Skip to main content
Glama

Synthex Forge — x402 Paid Agent Services

Issue Attestation Receipt

issue_attestation_receipt
Destructive

Mint a signed typed receipt for any transaction or action. use it rather than issue_attestation for attestation receipt, not attestation; an object with 26 fields including action, actor. $0.25 USDC.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
txNoThe tx this operation operates on. See the schema for its type and whether it is required.
actorNoWho performed the action. Used to attribute the record and to check the authority of the caller.
actionNoThe action being recorded or evaluated.
subjectNoThe subject the operation is applied to — an id, a URL or a name, depending on the operation.
metadataNoFree-form metadata recorded with the result.
receipt_typeNoThe receipt type this operation operates on. See the schema for its type and whether it is required.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
txNoThe `tx` field of the response.
kindNoThe `kind` field of the response.
noteNoA note on how the answer was produced.
actorNoThe `actor` field of the response.
actionNoThe `action` field of the response.
detailYesHuman-readable explanation of the verdict.
schemaNoThe `schema` field of the response.
sha256NoThe `sha256` field of the response.
mintsAtNoThe `mintsAt` field of the response.
receiptNoThe `receipt` field of the response.
subjectNoThe `subject` field of the response.
verdictYesThe decision this tool returned.
metadataNoThe `metadata` field of the response.
signedByNoThe `signedBy` field of the response.
algorithmNoThe `algorithm` field of the response.
signatureYesThe Ed25519 signature over the evidence core, base64-encoded.
typedCoreNoThe `typedCore` field of the response.
verify_atNoThe `verify_at` field of the response.
attestedAtNoThe `attestedAt` field of the response.
receiptTypeNoThe `receiptType` field of the response.
observationsNoThe `observations` field of the response.
publicKeyHexNoThe `publicKeyHex` field of the response.
receiptSchemaNoThe `receiptSchema` field of the response.
canonicalSha256NoThe `canonicalSha256` field of the response.
reproducibilityNoThe `reproducibility` field of the response.
verificationHintNoThe `verificationHint` field of the response.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed28 schema fields changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / action
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The `action` field of the response.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / actor
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The `actor` field of the response.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / algorithm
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The `algorithm` field of the response.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / attestedAt
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The `attestedAt` field of the response.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / canonicalSha256
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The `canonicalSha256` field of the response.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / detail
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Human-readable explanation of the verdict.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / kind
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The `kind` field of the response.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / metadata
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The `metadata` field of the response.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / mintsAt
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The `mintsAt` field of the response.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / note
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "A note on how the answer was produced.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / observations
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The `observations` field of the response.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / publicKeyHex
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The `publicKeyHex` field of the response.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / receipt
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The `receipt` field of the response.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / receiptSchema
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The `receiptSchema` field of the response.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / receiptType
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The `receiptType` field of the response.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / reproducibility
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The `reproducibility` field of the response.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / schema
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The `schema` field of the response.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / sha256
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The `sha256` field of the response.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / signature
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The Ed25519 signature over the evidence core, base64-encoded.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / signedBy
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The `signedBy` field of the response.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
    • removedOutput schema / properties / status
      Removed value: -{
      -  "type": "string"
      -}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / subject
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The `subject` field of the response.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / tx
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The `tx` field of the response.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / typedCore
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The `typedCore` field of the response.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / verdict
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The decision this tool returned.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / verificationHint
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The `verificationHint` field of the response.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / verify_at
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The `verify_at` field of the response.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / required
      Added value: +[
      +  "detail",
      +  "signature",
      +  "verdict"
      +]
  2. Added

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false and idempotent=false, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds genuinely new context — a $0.25 USDC cost and the shape of the returned object (26 fields including action, actor) — but does not explain why a mint is destructive or whether repeat calls create duplicate receipts.

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?

It is short and front-loads the core purpose plus the sibling comparison. However, the semicolon-chained fragments and the dangling 'not attestation' clause cost some readability.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, and cost plus the sibling routing are covered. What's missing is the behavioral contract for a destructive, non-idempotent mint — whether duplicate receipts are possible or what gets superseded.

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%, so all six parameters are already documented in the schema, making the baseline 3. The description only echoes 'action, actor' as example output fields rather than adding semantics for parameters like tx, subject or receipt_type.

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 gives a specific verb ('Mint') and resource ('signed typed receipt') and explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling issue_attestation. The trailing '$0.25 USDC' and '26 fields' fragments are informational rather than clarifying, but an agent can tell what the tool produces.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It does name the alternative ('use it rather than `issue_attestation`'), which is valuable routing guidance, but the qualifying clause ('for attestation receipt, not attestation') is garbled and leaves the actual selection boundary ambiguous. No prerequisites or when-not-to-use beyond that one comparison.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.