Skip to main content
Glama

Agentic Endpoints

by com.oliverkiss

Retrieve an encrypted secret

vault_retrieve
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a previously stored ciphertext. Requires the namespace_token. Costs $0.02 in USDC on Base, paid via the x402 protocol.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keyYesItem key
namespaceYesIsolation scope
namespace_tokenYesOne-time token issued by the first call that claimed this namespace. Required for every later call.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
algNoAlgorithm label you supplied at store time
keyYesThe key that was read
statusYes'retrieved'
receiptNoPayment receipt
namespaceNoIsolation scope
ciphertextYesExactly the bytes you stored. Decrypt these yourself.
created_atNoISO-8601 creation time
expires_atNoExpiry, or null if it never expires
updated_atNoISO-8601 last write

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond the annotations by disclosing the $0.02 USDC cost on Base via x402 and the namespace_token requirement. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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 two sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose and then provides the two most important operational details: the token requirement and the cost. Every sentence 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 full parameter schema, output schema, and annotations, the description covers the missing context: cost, payment protocol, network, and token prerequisite. Nothing critical is absent for an agent to correctly invoke the tool.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, and all three parameters have clear descriptions in the input schema. The description only briefly mentions namespace_token as required, which adds little beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema carries the parameter documentation burden.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description uses a specific verb+resource pair, 'Retrieve a previously stored ciphertext,' which clearly states the tool's function. It is distinguishable from sibling tools like vault_store, vault_delete, and vault_list even without explicitly naming alternatives.

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?

The description clearly signals when to use this tool: to retrieve a previously stored ciphertext. It also provides an important prerequisite, 'Requires the namespace_token,' which helps the agent understand the call context. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or state when-not-to-use.

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

All Agentic Endpoints 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

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool maps to a distinct resource and action: meetings have import/list/search/get, the once-key system has claim/complete/release, vault has store/retrieve/exists/list/delete/rotate_token, and compress/pdf_parse/scrape are separate utilities. No two tools appear to perform the same side effect, so an agent should not struggle to choose among them.

Naming Consistency5/5

Tools use consistent snake_case and mostly follow a domain_verb pattern (meetings_*, once_key_*, vault_*), with standalone verbs like compress, scrape, and pdf_parse for single utilities. The naming is predictable and easy to extend.

Tool Count4/5

At 16 tools the server is just above the ideal 3-15 range, but the count is justified by six distinct capability clusters. Each tool earns its place, and nothing feels redundant.

Completeness4/5

Core lifecycles are covered well: vault has full CRUD plus token rotation, once-key has claim/complete/release, and meetings provide import/search/get/list. Minor gaps include no meeting update/delete and no direct namespace management, but these are workable rather than blocking.

Resources