Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

SatsDNS

by com.satsdns
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Your SatsDNS account: objects, invoices, state (free, API key or signature)

account_objects
Read-onlyIdempotent

Free, read-only: the account's state and limits, or the zones, hostnames or invoices it owns. With api_key, only the objects the key's scope covers and only their invoices (the account view of limits and counts is the same for every key). Called without nip98 it returns signature_required: the exact URL, method and body to sign, the body's sha256 and an unsigned kind 27235 event template (with proof of work for accounts without a paid order). Sign that, then call again with the same arguments plus nip98. Each signed event works once, within 60 s. Secrets that are ours to receive: object tokens, account API keys (jdk_), signed NIP-98 events; never a private key (nsec or 64 hex characters), wallet connection string or seed words. A raw hex key or seed words inside a sentence cannot be caught here.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "type": "<type>"
    },
    "name": "account_objects"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeYesaccount: state, tier, limits and whether proof of work is needed; zones, hostnames: what the account owns; invoices: the 50 newest.
nip98NoThe signed NIP-98 event (base64 of its JSON) for exactly the request the signature_required answer of the same call named. Sign it with your own Nostr signer (local key, NIP-46 bunker or a signer tool); never send the private key itself, in any form (nsec, hex or seed words).
api_keyNoA scoped account API key (jdk_...) made in the dashboard. It passes through your model context and transcript: treat it like a password. Key model: a key reads (or, with write access, changes) only the objects in its scope, and sees only their invoices; every key reads the account view (limits and counts); a key never orders new objects and never receives a new object's shown-once token.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive annotations, it discloses the free tier, the scoping semantics of API keys, the signature_required response contract (URL, method, body sha256, kind 27235 template with proof of work), the single-use 60-second validity of signed events, and explicit secret-handling boundaries. That is substantive behavioral context an agent cannot get from 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?

The key constraint (free, read-only) is front-loaded, and each sentence carries operational weight — the auth loop and secret rules are not filler. It is dense and reads as one long paragraph rather than separable steps, which slightly hurts scannability for a multi-mode procedure.

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?

With full schema coverage, no output schema and safety annotations present, the description covers everything an agent needs: what each type returns, how to satisfy NIP-98 auth, how long a signature lasts, and what must never be transmitted. No relevant calling decision is left unexplained.

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 description coverage is 100% and every parameter is already documented in detail, including the enum meanings of type and the key model for api_key. The description restates and lightly reinforces that (key scope, invoices for the 50 newest), but adds no syntax or format detail the schema lacks, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 opening clause names the resource precisely — account state/limits, owned zones, hostnames and invoices — and the read-only stance is explicit, so an agent knows exactly what it gets back. It does not name the sibling tools it substitutes for (zone_status, order_status, account_order), so the differentiation is left to inference from the type enum.

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?

It clearly states the two invocation modes: with api_key (scoped reads of objects and their invoices) versus without (full account view), and it gives the exact two-step procedure when nip98 is absent. It also implicitly frames when not to use it (a key never orders objects, never receives shown-once tokens), though it never routes the agent to a specific sibling by name.

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

All SatsDNS toolsInspect
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