Rightshold

Check an app or skill before installing it

check_listing

Read-onlyIdempotent

Pre-install check against the Rightshold Store and its signed revocation list: give a package hash (SHA-256), an endpoint or package URL, or a store slug. Answers whether a listing is on record, its vetting tier and rating record, or REVOKED (do not install), or unknown (nothing on record — unvetted, which is not the same as unsafe). Call with {"slug": "rightshold-rights"}.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "check_listing"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`url`	No	Listing or repo URL
`hash`	No	SHA-256 of the package
`slug`	No	Store slug

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 20, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / hash / description
```
Added value: +"SHA-256 of the package"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / slug / description
```
Added value: +"Store slug"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / url / description
```
Added value: +"Listing or repo URL"
```
Changed1 schema field changedOct 14, 2026
- changedOutput schema / (root)
```
Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "type": "object"
+}
```
AddedOct 12, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, closed-world, non-destructive), so the bar is lower. The description earns credit for disambiguating statuses, particularly that 'unknown' means nothing on record / unvetted and explicitly 'is not the same as unsafe' – a genuinely useful interpretive cue beyond the annotations.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loads the purpose, then the accepted inputs, then the outcome taxonomy, with no filler. The inline JSON example is slightly clunky embedded in a description but earns its place as a usage cue.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With an output schema present, return values need not be explained. The description covers purpose, accepted inputs, and status semantics for a simple 3-param read-only tool; nothing essential is missing, though it never names the sibling to use for discovery.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds that the three inputs are alternatives ('give a hash, an endpoint/URL, or a slug') and supplies a concrete example call, clarifying how to choose among optional parameters in a way the schema does not.

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?

States a specific verb (check), resource (listing), and scope (Rightshold Store plus its signed revocation list), and enumerates what it answers (on record / vetting tier / REVOKED / unknown). An agent can tell it apart from discovery siblings like search_store without opening the schema.

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 phrase 'Pre-install check' clearly frames when to use it (before installing an app or skill). It gives no explicit exclusions or named alternatives, so it stops short of a 5, but the usage context is unambiguous.

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

All Rightshold 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?