Synthex Forge — x402 Paid Agent Services

Verify Agent Credential

verify_agent_credential

Read-onlyIdempotent

verify a credential's signature, expiry and scope. use it rather than issue_agent_credential for agent credential specifically; an object with 14 fields including checkedAt, claims.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`required_scope`	No	Optional: when supplied, the credential must carry this scope or the check fails with credential_scope.
`credential_token`	Yes	The compact credential token issued by POST /v1/credentials/issue.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`note`	No	A note on how the answer was produced.
`valid`	Yes	Whether the artifact verified.
`claims`	No	The `claims` field of the response.
`reason`	No	Why the verdict was reached.
`scopes`	No	The `scopes` field of the response.
`subject`	No	The `subject` field of the response.
`consumed`	No	The `consumed` field of the response.
`max_uses`	No	The `max_uses` field of the response.
`checkedAt`	No	The `checkedAt` field of the response.
`issued_at`	No	The `issued_at` field of the response.
`expires_at`	No	The `expires_at` field of the response.
`credential_id`	No	The `credential_id` field of the response.
`policy_sha256`	No	The `policy_sha256` field of the response.
`scopeVocabulary`	No	The `scopeVocabulary` field of the response.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed16 schema fields changedOct 31, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / checkedAt

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The `checkedAt` field of the response.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / claims

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The `claims` field of the response.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / consumed

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The `consumed` field of the response.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / credential_id

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The `credential_id` field of the response.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / expires_at

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The `expires_at` field of the response.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / issued_at

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The `issued_at` field of the response.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / max_uses

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The `max_uses` 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 / policy_sha256

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The `policy_sha256` field of the response.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / reason

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Why the verdict was reached.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / scopeVocabulary

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The `scopeVocabulary` field of the response.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / scopes

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The `scopes` 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 / valid

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Whether the artifact verified.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

addedOutput schema / required
```
Added value: +[
+  "valid"
+]
```

AddedOct 31, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered elsewhere. The description's remaining behavioral content is the return shape ('an object with 14 fields including checkedAt, claims'), which is largely duplicated by the existing output schema. It says nothing about failure behavior for an invalid signature beyond the scope check already documented in the schema.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the verification subject before the sibling routing. The trailing 'an object with 14 fields including checkedAt, claims' is a ragged fragment and is redundant given the output schema, costing it a point.

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 and annotations covering safety, the description need not explain return values or side effects. What is checked (signature, expiry, scope) is stated, leaving only minor gaps such as error behavior on an invalid signature.

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%, so both credential_token and required_scope are fully documented in the schema, including the credential_scope failure mode. The description adds no syntax, format, or defaulting details beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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 ('verify') plus the resource ('a credential') and enumerates exactly what is checked: signature, expiry and scope. It also names the sibling it is not (issue_agent_credential), so an agent can distinguish verify from issue without opening either 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?

Explicitly routes the agent: 'use it rather than `issue_agent_credential` for agent credential specifically.' That gives a clear when-to-use signal, though the contrast with an issuing tool is a weak one since the two are not easily confused, and no when-not-to-use condition is given.

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

All Synthex Forge — x402 Paid Agent Services 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.