Skip to main content
Glama

Synthex Forge — x402 Paid Agent Services

Verify Bio Provenance

verify_bio_provenance
Read-onlyIdempotent

BioTrust Service 12 — verify a dataset manifest. use it rather than verify_bio_audit for bio provenance, not bio audit; an object with 9 fields including code, computed_root_sha256. $0.05 USDC.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
expectedNoThe expected this operation operates on. See the schema for its type and whether it is required.
manifestNoThe manifest describing the delivered or expected artifact.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
codeNoThe `code` field of the response.
errorNoThe machine-readable error code, when the operation failed.
filesNoThe `files` field of the response.
detailYesHuman-readable explanation of the verdict.
verdictYesThe decision this tool returned.
findingsNoThe `findings` field of the response.
severityNoThe `severity` field of the response.
file_countNoThe `file_count` field of the response.
computed_root_sha256NoThe `computed_root_sha256` field of the response.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed11 schema fields changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / code
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The `code` field of the response.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / computed_root_sha256
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The `computed_root_sha256` field of the response.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / detail
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Human-readable explanation of the verdict.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / error
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The machine-readable error code, when the operation failed.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / file_count
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The `file_count` field of the response.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / files
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The `files` field of the response.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / findings
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The `findings` field of the response.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / severity
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The `severity` field of the response.",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
    • removedOutput schema / properties / status
      Removed value: -{
      -  "type": "string"
      -}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / verdict
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The decision this tool returned.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / required
      Added value: +[
      +  "detail",
      +  "verdict"
      +]
  2. Added

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so safety is covered. The description adds a genuine non-annotation trait — the operation is paid, at $0.05 USDC — plus a hint about the result shape (9 fields including code and computed_root_sha256).

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

Conciseness3/5

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

Front-loaded with the verb and resource, and no sentence is pure filler, but the content is crammed into one run-on with a decorative service label and semicolon-joined fragments; the return-shape clause reads as a sentence fragment rather than structure.

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 needn't be explained, and annotations cover the safety profile. Still, for a paid verification call with a nested `manifest` and an ambiguously typed `expected`, the description never says what the verification actually checks or what a failing result looks like.

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 baseline 3 applies. The description adds nothing about the two parameters, and the schema's own text for `expected` is boilerplate ('The expected this operation operates on'), so the meaning of the array-of-up-to-64 vs null choice is never clarified anywhere.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('verify a dataset manifest') and explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling `verify_bio_audit` by naming the domain split (bio provenance vs bio audit). The opaque 'BioTrust Service 12' prefix and the dangling fragment about the 9-field result object keep it from being a clean 5.

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?

Gives an explicit routing rule: use this rather than `verify_bio_audit` for provenance work. However it names only one of several plausible alternatives (e.g. `run_bio_verification_checks`, `verify_c2pa_provenance`, `register_bio_trust_provider` are unaddressed), so the guidance is clear but incomplete.

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.