Enclave402

Store a JSON document on IPFS via a managed pinning service; returns its CID and a gateway URL.

pin_storage

Store a JSON document (object or string, up to 8 KB) on IPFS through a managed pinning service and return its content identifier (CID v1) plus an HTTP gateway URL. MUST be invoked when an agent needs durable, content-addressed storage for memory, decisions, artifacts or metadata that other agents can fetch by CID. Do NOT send raw binary, files over 8 KB, or an existing CID to re-pin. Settles $0.008 USDC via x402 on Base; failed or unavailable pins are never charged.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	No	Optional human label stored with the pin.
`content`	Yes	JSON object or string to store (serialized size up to 8 KB).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ts`	No	Response timestamp, UNIX milliseconds
`cid`	No	IPFS CID of the stored content
`size`	No	Pinned size in bytes as reported by the provider
`pinned`	No	true when the provider accepted and pinned the content
`status`	No	Provider pin status (pinned)
`gateway`	No	Resolvable HTTP gateway URL for the CID
`settled`	No	true when an x402 payment settled for this response
`provider`	No	Pinning provider

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 17, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "cid": {
+      "description": "IPFS CID of the stored content"
+    },
+    "gateway": {
+      "description": "Resolvable HTTP gateway URL for the CID"
+    },
+    "pinned": {
+      "description": "true when the provider accepted and pinned the content"
+    },
+    "provider": {
+      "description": "Pinning provider"
+    },
+    "settled": {
+      "description": "true when an x402 payment settled for this response"
+    },
+    "size": {
+      "description": "Pinned size in bytes as reported by the provider"
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "description": "Provider pin status (pinned)"
+    },
+    "ts": {
+      "description": "Response timestamp, UNIX milliseconds"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

AddedSep 17, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the write-but-non-destructive nature is implied. The description adds valuable behavioral context: the $0.008 USDC settlement on Base, the guarantee that failed pins are never charged, and the size/type restrictions. This exceeds what annotations provide.

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 description is compact and front-loaded: first the operation and result, then the must-use context, then explicit exclusions, then cost details. Every sentence earns its place with no filler, creating a clear and scannable definition.

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 an output schema (not shown but declared), return format is handled. The description covers usage context, all constraints (type, size, cost, failure behavior), and output expectations (CID + gateway URL). Nothing an agent needs to invoke this tool correctly is missing.

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% with clear descriptions for both parameters (content and name). The description adds extra meaning beyond the schema: the 8 KB serialized size limit, the JSON-only restriction, and the prohibition on raw binary and existing CIDs for re-pinning. These are important semantic guards not fully captured in the schema.

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 description clearly states the verb (store), the resource (JSON document on IPFS), and the outputs (CID and gateway URL). It explicitly distinguishes this from sibling tools (compute, get, vet, etc.) by being the only storage tool, and it specifies constraints (8 KB, JSON only) that make the purpose unambiguous.

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: 'MUST be invoked when an agent needs durable, content-addressed storage...' It also lists exclusions: 'Do NOT send raw binary, files over 8 KB, or an existing CID to re-pin.' While it doesn't name alternative tools, the exclusion of re-pinning and binary signals clear boundaries, and no sibling offers similar storage.

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

All Enclave402 tools Inspect

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

Need Help?