Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Emer Ai Tools

by com.emercoin.ai
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin
This connector has been deprecated

Moved to com.steledger/gateway — same service, now at https://api.steledger.com/mcp

Transfer records

transfer_records
Destructive

Hand your records over from the gateway's wallet to an address you choose, in one transaction. IRREVERSIBLE: once the block confirms, the gateway can no longer change, renew or return them — nor can anyone else but the holder of to_address. Values are carried over unchanged, and each record gets about a century added to its term, since the gateway will not be able to renew it.

Why you might: with an address whose key you hold, the records are really yours — you can prove control by signing, and payments sent to your identity name reach you rather than the gateway. Changing a record afterwards needs your own Emercoin node and its fees. With an address no one holds a key to, the records are sealed: provably unchangeable by anyone until the term ends. If you only want proof that something existed at a given time, do not transfer — a record held by the gateway is already dated.

Only records under your own identity (ai:gh:<github_id> and its :mem: records) can be moved, and only once they are confirmed. Requires a signed-in session; each record counts as one write against the FREE-tier limits. After a transfer, register_identity and re-storing a moved hash fail with not_held; new memories are held by the gateway again.

Changing a record costs a network fee in EMC. If you hold the key and have no EMC, set fee_grant: the gateway then also sends 0.01 EMC (about fifty value updates) to to_address in a separate transaction — once per GitHub account, within a daily budget. If it is not available the call is refused before anything moves (fee_grant_used, fee_grant_unavailable), so you can decide to transfer without it. Do not ask for it with an address no one holds a key to: nobody could spend it. Returns the transaction id, the names moved, the fee funds if sent, and a plain statement of what changes.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
namesNoRecords to transfer, e.g. ["ai:gh:123", "ai:gh:123:mem:<hash>"] — only your own. Omit and set `everything` instead to move them all.
fee_grantNoAlso send a small amount of EMC to `to_address` to pay network fees for changing these records later from your own node. Once per account; refused before anything moves if it is not available.
everythingNoTransfer your identity and every live memory at once (up to 100). Use instead of `names`.
to_addressYesEmercoin address that will hold the records from now on. Any valid address is accepted: one whose key you hold, or one no one holds a key to, which seals the records.
irreversibleYesMust be true. Confirms you understand the gateway can never change, renew or return these records afterwards.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
txidYes
afterYes
countYes
namesYes
quotaYes
fee_grantYes
to_addressYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedOutput schema / description
      Added value: +"One transaction for the whole transfer: its id, the names moved, where\nthey went, what that means from now on, the network-fee funds if asked for\n(else null), and the writes left afterwards."
  2. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / fee_grant
      Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "description": "Also send a small amount of EMC to `to_address` to pay network fees for changing these records later from your own node. Once per account; refused before anything moves if it is not available.",
+  "title": "Fee Grant",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • addedOutput schema / $defs / FeeGrantResult
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Network-fee funds sent with a transfer: the amount in EMC, and the id of\nthe transaction that paid it — null if it could not be sent.",
+  "properties": {
+    "amount": {
+      "title": "Amount",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "txid": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "title": "Txid"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "amount",
+    "txid"
+  ],
+  "title": "FeeGrantResult",
+  "type": "object"
+}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / fee_grant
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "$ref": "#/$defs/FeeGrantResult"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ]
+}
    • changedOutput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "txid",
-  "count",
-  "names",
-  "to_address",
-  "after",
-  "quota"
-]New value: +[
+  "txid",
+  "count",
+  "names",
+  "to_address",
+  "after",
+  "fee_grant",
+  "quota"
+]
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, but the description adds substantial context: irreversibility details, term extension, free-tier write accounting, fee_grant once-per-account behavior with a pre-move refusal guarantee, and specific error codes (not_held, fee_grant_used, fee_grant_unavailable). This goes well beyond what the annotations convey.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The response is front-loaded with the core action and an uppercase IRREVERSIBLE warning, followed by rationale, constraints, fee_grant behavior, and returns. Despite its length, each section supports a destructive irreversible operation and earns its place.

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 complexity of a destructive transfer tool with fee grants and specific failure modes, the description covers eligibility, session requirements, write-limit accounting, fee_grant edge cases, failure paths, and return content. An output schema exists, and the description still summarizes what comes back.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning: it explains why irreversible must be true and the consequences, clarifies fee_grant semantics and when not to request it ('Do not ask for it with an address no one holds a key to'), and reinforces that names must be your own records with everything as an alternative.

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?

The first sentence states a specific verb and resource — 'Hand your records over from the gateway's wallet to an address you choose, in one transaction' — and clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like read_record and store_memory by naming the transfer/sealing tradeoff.

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?

It explicitly says when to transfer ('with an address whose key you hold, the records are really yours') and when not to ('If you only want proof that something existed at a given time, do not transfer'), and it names an alternative (a gateway-held record is already dated). It also states preconditions: only confirmed records under your own identity, signed-in session required.

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

All Emer Ai Tools toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources