UseTested — Receipts-Verified Service Reviews

Get receipts-verified service review (free)

get_review

Read-onlyIdempotent

Full receipts-verified review of one agent-economy service: BUY/CAUTION/AVOID/INTERIM verdict (INTERIM = single verified result, pending deep review), scores, measured latency/error rate, and on-chain purchase receipts. Free.

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": {
      "service": "<service>"
    },
    "name": "get_review"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`service`	Yes	Exact service name, as listed by search_services (free)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`note`	Yes
`scores`	Yes
`service`	Yes
`verdict`	Yes
`endpoint`	Yes
`measured`	Yes
`receipts`	Yes
`updated_at`	Yes
`price_per_call`	Yes
`refund_behavior`	Yes
`methodology_version`	Yes
`verdict_downgraded_note`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 30, 2026
- addedOutput schema / properties / verdict_downgraded_note
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
First observedOct 21, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, closed-world behavior, so the description earns credit for adding domain semantics: the BUY/CAUTION/AVOID verdict taxonomy, the meaning of INTERIM ('single verified result, pending deep review'), and the zero-cost claim. It doesn't say what happens when a service has no review yet, which is the main unaddressed behavior.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

One sentence with the core purpose front-loaded, followed by the enumerated contents and a one-word cost note. Every clause carries information and nothing is redundant.

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, annotations, and a fully documented parameter, the only real gap is the not-found/no-review-yet case and how this differs from request_review. The INTERIM definition is the kind of context an agent genuinely needs and would otherwise lack.

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% and the single 'service' parameter is already documented as an exact name from search_services, so the description adds nothing parameter-specific. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the work.

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 ('Full receipts-verified review of one agent-economy service') and enumerates the payload: verdict, scores, latency/error rate, on-chain receipts. It doesn't name a sibling, but 'of one service' implicitly contrasts with the listing tool search_services.

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?

Usage is only implied: you call this to inspect a specific service's verdict before acting. 'Free' signals cost, but there is no explicit when-to-use-vs-alternatives guidance (e.g. search_services to discover names, request_review to create a review).

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

All UseTested — Receipts-Verified Service Reviews 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.

Resources

Need Help?