Lumethic Photo Verification
Server Details
Verify photos are genuine camera captures, not AI-generated: C2PA checks and RAW+JPEG forensics.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Score is being calculated. Check back soon.
Available Tools
11 toolscreate_verification_uploadAInspect
Get pre-signed S3 PUT URLs to upload a large RAW + JPEG directly (avoids inlining bytes and bypasses request-size limits). PUT each file to its upload_url, then call verify_photo with the returned object_key values as raw_object_key / image_object_key.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Without annotations, the description fully covers the behavioral aspect: it returns pre-signed URLs and outlines the subsequent upload and verification steps. It does not mention side effects like file storage or permissions, but the core behavior is transparent.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is exceptionally concise (two sentences) and front-loaded with the primary action. Every sentence provides essential information without redundancy.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool has no parameters, a simple purpose, and a known output schema (though not shown), the description sufficiently covers the entire workflow: obtaining URLs, uploading, and subsequent verification. No gaps are evident.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
There are zero parameters in the input schema, so description does not need to add parameter semantics. Baseline score of 4 is appropriate as per instructions for tools with no parameters.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the verb 'get' and resource 'pre-signed S3 PUT URLs', specifying the context of uploading large RAW+JPEG files to avoid inlining bytes. It distinguishes from sibling tools like verify_photo and get_verification by describing a unique upload initiation process.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description explicitly details when to use the tool (for large files bypassing request-size limits) and provides a clear two-step usage flow: PUT to upload_url then call verify_photo. While it does not explicitly list when not to use, the purpose is evident and no alternative tools are suggested, which is acceptable given uniqueness.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
get_account_usageInspect
Get the authenticated account's monthly verification quota: plan, used, limit, and remaining. Call this before verify_photo to check the free-tier allowance.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
get_listingInspect
Fetch a marketplace listing by id: title, description, per-license pricing, terms, and sales totals. There is no public directory — you must know the listing UUID.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| listing_id | Yes |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
get_verificationInspect
Retrieve a verification by id: processing status and per-algorithm authenticity results. Works for both API-key callers (scoped to their account) and keyless anonymous callers (any anonymous verification, which are public by link).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| verification_id | Yes |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
list_my_listingsInspect
List the marketplace listings owned by your account (with pricing and sales totals).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| offset | No |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
list_verificationsInspect
List the account's verifications, most recent first. Optional filters: status (pending|queued|in_progress|completed|failed) and result (true=authentic, false=not).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| size | No | ||
| offset | No | ||
| result | No | ||
| status | No |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
verify_content_credentialsInspect
Verify a single image's authenticity from its embedded Content Credentials (C2PA) — use this when you only have the image and no RAW camera file. Confirms capture provenance and flags AI-generated or edited images. Free: it does not consume your verification quota. Provide the image inline as image_base64, or — for large files — call create_verification_upload and pass the returned image_object_key. Returns a verification id; poll get_verification for the result. Works without an API key on the keyless anonymous tier (rate-limited; returns an anonymous_user_id to reuse). For the strongest forensic check, use verify_photo with a RAW + JPEG pair instead.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| image_base64 | No | ||
| image_filename | No | upload.jpg | |
| image_object_key | No | ||
| anonymous_user_id | No |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
verify_photoInspect
Verify a photo's authenticity from a RAW camera file and its JPEG export. Provide the files either inline as raw_base64 + image_base64 (small files), or — for large files — call create_verification_upload first and pass the returned raw_object_key + image_object_key. Returns a verification id; poll get_verification for the result. With an API key this counts against your monthly quota (free tier: 5/month). Without a key it runs on the keyless anonymous tier (rate-limited; returns an anonymous_user_id to reuse; anonymous verifications can't be listed or shared until you register).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| raw_base64 | No | ||
| image_base64 | No | ||
| raw_filename | No | upload.raw | |
| image_filename | No | upload.jpg | |
| raw_object_key | No | ||
| image_object_key | No | ||
| anonymous_user_id | No |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!