Skip to main content
Glama

agent-ready-kit

by com.mudko

Get vendor verification info

verify_credentials
Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this when the calling agent (or its user) wants to verify our certifications, compliance posture, or operational record before sharing buyer_context. Returns a URL to our signed .well-known/attestations.json plus a summary. Part of trust-progressive disclosure — buyer agents are expected to verify us before deepening data sharing.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
compliance_filterNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
statusYes
summaryNo
verifiable_atYes
certificationsNo

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds context about trust-progressive disclosure and return of URL/summary, reinforcing safe behavior without contradiction.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with directive usage guidance followed by contextual framing. No wasted words; every sentence adds value.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple read-only tool with good annotations and output schema, the description covers the high-level purpose and usage context well. However, the complete lack of parameter explanation leaves a notable gap.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The only parameter compliance_filter has 0% schema description coverage, and the description provides no explanation of its purpose, format, or expected values. This is a significant omission.

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 tool is for verifying certifications, compliance posture, or operational record, and specifies it returns a URL and summary. It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning trust-progressive disclosure and buyer_context, which aligns with no other sibling tool.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explicitly says when to use: 'before sharing buyer_context' and as part of 'trust-progressive disclosure'. Provides clear context, though does not explicitly mention when not to use or list alternatives.

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

All agent-ready-kit toolsInspect
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

A4.3/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose, with descriptions that prevent confusion. Tools like scan_site and run_site_audit are differentiated by their focus on AI-readiness vs. site quality.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case, with clear action words like 'scan', 'create', 'get', 'verify'. Even longer names like 'summarize_scan_for_humans' maintain consistency.

Tool Count4/5

22 tools is slightly above the ideal range but justified by the comprehensive scope of the server, covering scanning, analysis, quoting, file delivery, and verification. Some tools like generate_files and get_customer_files could overlap but serve different contexts.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the entire workflow from site scanning to deployment verification, with no obvious dead ends. All necessary operations for making a site agent-ready are present, including edge cases like x402 validation and credential verification.

Resources