api

Verify Evidence Bundle

bundle.verify

Read-onlyIdempotent

Verify the cryptographic integrity of an evidence bundle (ev_...) owned by your API key. Checks manifest hash, EIP-191 signature, and R2 artifact hashes. Free — no credits consumed. Use when you need to confirm a bundle has not been tampered with. For quick metadata lookups (without full crypto verification), use bundle.get instead. Also returns a signed action receipt (rcpt_...) binding this verify call to the bundle manifest — list with receipt.list, verify with receipt.verify. Returns: { valid: boolean, bundle_id, manifest_sha256, checks: { status, manifest_hash, signature, artifacts: [{ name, ok }] }, tampered: string[], signer_address: string|null, attestation_tx: string|null, url: string, captured_at: string, receipt: ActionReceipt|null } Example prompts:

"Verify the cryptographic integrity of bundle ev_550e8400."
"Is this evidence bundle still valid and untampered?"
"Deep-check the manifest hash and signature of my bundle."

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`bundle_id`	Yes	Evidence bundle ID (ev_...) returned by extract or notarize. Example: "ev_550e8400-e29b-41d4-a716-446655440000"

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	No
`valid`	Yes
`checks`	Yes
`receipt`	Yes
`tampered`	Yes
`bundle_id`	Yes
`captured_at`	No
`attestation_tx`	No
`signer_address`	No
`manifest_sha256`	Yes

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Discloses that the operation is free (no credits consumed) and includes details of cryptographic checks performed. Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent, and the description adds context about returning a signed action receipt. No contradictions with annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Well-structured with clear sections, including example prompts. While comprehensive, the description could be slightly trimmed without losing clarity, but it remains efficient and informative.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the presence of annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint) and a full output schema in the description, the tool definition is complete. It covers purpose, usage, parameters, return values, and example interactions. No gaps detected.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Only one parameter (bundle_id) with 100% schema coverage. The description adds context by specifying the format (ev_...) and providing an example ID. The schema alone is sufficient, but the description reinforces understanding.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states the verb 'Verify' and the resource 'Evidence Bundle', specifying the cryptographic integrity checks (manifest hash, EIP-191 signature, R2 artifact hashes). It distinguishes itself from sibling tool bundle.get for quick metadata lookups without full verification.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly states when to use: to confirm a bundle has not been tampered with. Provides alternative tool (bundle.get) for quick metadata lookups. Also mentions related tools receipt.list and receipt.verify for the receipt. Includes example prompts to guide usage.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All api tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose, with no overlap. The category prefixes (account, bundle, collection, document, job, receipt, url) and specific action names (get, notarize, verify, create, list, etc.) ensure that an agent can unambiguously select the correct tool for any task.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent category.action or category.action_noun pattern using snake_case (e.g., bundle.get, collection.add_document, url.translate). No mixed conventions or irregular names, making the pattern predictable and easy to learn.

Tool Count4/5

With 22 tools, the set is somewhat large but each tool addresses a distinct need within a broad domain (evidence management, document AI, collections, URL processing, job tracking, receipts). The count is slightly above the typical well-scoped range but still reasonable given the scope.

Completeness2/5

The tool surface has notable gaps: there is no tool to create or delete an evidence bundle, nor to update collections or bundles. The core workflow of creating a bundle from a document is missing, and the lifecycle is incomplete, which would likely cause agent failures in typical use cases.

Resources

Need Help?