Synthex Forge — x402 Paid Agent Services

Verify Business Screen

verify_business_screen

Read-onlyIdempotent

recompute the digest and verify the signature of a screen. use it rather than assess_business_eligibility for business screen, not business eligibility; an object with 12 fields including algorithm, basis.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`signature`	Yes	The Ed25519 signature (hex).
`answerCore`	Yes	The answerCore object returned by POST /v1/sme/screen.
`output_sha256`	No	The output_sha256 returned alongside the answer (optional; when supplied it is compared against a freshly recomputed digest).

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`note`	No	A note on how the answer was produced.
`basis`	No	The `basis` field of the response.
`verdict`	Yes	The decision this tool returned.
`algorithm`	No	The `algorithm` field of the response.
`reproduced`	No	The `reproduced` field of the response.
`publicKeyHex`	No	The `publicKeyHex` field of the response.
`signature_ok`	No	The `signature_ok` field of the response.
`engine_version`	No	The `engine_version` field of the response.
`signature_error`	No	The `signature_error` field of the response.
`sha256_recomputed`	No	The `sha256_recomputed` field of the response.
`sha256_reproduced`	No	The `sha256_reproduced` field of the response.
`output_sha256_match`	No	The `output_sha256_match` field of the response.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed14 schema fields changedOct 31, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / algorithm

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

addedOutput schema / properties / basis

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

addedOutput schema / properties / engine_version

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The `engine_version` 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 / output_sha256_match

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The `output_sha256_match` field of the response.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / publicKeyHex

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

addedOutput schema / properties / reproduced

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

addedOutput schema / properties / sha256_recomputed

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The `sha256_recomputed` field of the response.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / sha256_reproduced

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The `sha256_reproduced` field of the response.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / signature_error

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

addedOutput schema / properties / signature_ok

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The `signature_ok` 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: +[
+  "verdict"
+]
```

AddedOct 31, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the digest is freshly recomputed and that output_sha256 is compared when supplied, but it never says what happens on mismatch (error vs. false result) — the single most important behavior for a verify tool.

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?

Two short sentences with the action front-loaded, but the middle clause ('for business screen, not business eligibility') is garbled enough to require re-reading. Sizing is right; clarity of phrasing is not.

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?

Output schema and rich annotations reduce the burden, but a verification tool's description should state the failure mode and whether verification is against a locally recomputed digest or a server anchor. With a nested answerCore object and three params, the definition is adequate but leaves that gap.

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 signature, answerCore and output_sha256 are already documented, and output_sha256's comparison semantics live in the schema. The description's 'an object with 12 fields including algorithm, basis' is ambiguous about which object it refers to and adds little beyond the schema.

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 specific verbs and resource: recompute the digest and verify the signature of a screen. It also pre-emptively distinguishes itself from assess_business_eligibility, so an agent can tell the two apart 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 names the alternative (assess_business_eligibility) and the discriminator ('for business screen, not business eligibility'), which is real routing guidance. The clause is awkwardly worded and gives no other preconditions or when-not guidance, so it falls short of a clean 5.

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.