Skip to main content
Glama

Coordination roster check

wever_coordination-roster-check
Read-only

Agent Coordination: submit the roster of agents taking part in one job: each agent with its id, its name, a verifiable identity (a key id, a DID, a service account or a registry entry), its role and what it may read, write and approve; optionally the roles the job needs with whether each is required; and optionally every area that needs an approval, such as merges, spending or publishing. The signed report lists every agent as identified, unidentified or unnamed with its rights, every role with the agents holding it and every approval area with its approvers, and names rights no one can be held to: unnamed or unidentifiable agents holding write or approval rights, roles with no agent in them and one agent holding every approval; then approval areas nobody may approve, areas approved only by the agent that writes them, reading agents with no identity, agents with no role and roles the job does not list, with the fix for each. This reads the participants in one multi-agent job: whether an organisation keeps one current list of all its agents is wever_fleet-roster-check and whether one registry covers every deployed agent is wever_agent-registry-check. Verdict rights_unaccountable, rights_gaps, rights_unverified or rights_accountable. POST /api/coordination-roster-check. Reads only the material in the call: no network request, fetch, money movement, message, sharing, configuration change or external write. Paid URL: 0.10 USDC per call on Base via x402 exact, with the shared 10 signed-wallet free calls per rolling 30 days. Bind X-Wever-Wallet-Proof to the exact JSON arguments and the tool route. Returns a report with an Ed25519 signed receipt. Contract: /api/agent-coordination-contract. Human page: https://weverlabs.com/agent-coordination/.

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": {
      "agents": "<agents>"
    },
    "name": "wever_coordination-roster-check"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
labelNoOptional name recorded in the report.
rolesNoEach role the job needs.
agentsYesEach participating agent.
approvalsNoEvery area that needs an approval, such as merges, spending or publishing.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds substantial context on top: no network request, fetch, money movement or external write; a 0.10 USDC x402 charge with 10 signed-wallet free calls per rolling 30 days; the X-Wever-Wallet-Proof binding requirement; and an Ed25519 signed receipt. It also enumerates the verdict values (rights_unaccountable, rights_gaps, rights_unverified, rights_accountable), which is behavior no annotation conveys.

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?

The purpose and sibling routing are correctly front-loaded, but the middle portion is a single sprawling sentence enumerating every finding the report can return, which is hard to parse and partly duplicates the contract link. It is dense rather than wasteful, but it would benefit from being split into scannable clauses.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by describing the report contents, the verdict set, the signed receipt and the endpoint. For a read-only single-call check with four parameters, nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly is missing.

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 the schema already documents label, roles, agents and approvals, including that 'required' defaults to true and what counts as a verifiable identity. The description restates those fields rather than adding new syntax, formats or constraints, so it sits at the baseline for a fully documented 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?

The opening clause names a specific verb and resource: 'submit the roster of agents taking part in one job', then enumerates exactly what each agent entry carries. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from wever_fleet-roster-check and wever_agent-registry-check, so an agent can route without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It states the selection condition precisely ('the participants in one multi-agent job') and names the two alternatives with the condition that selects each (organisation-wide current list vs. registry coverage of deployed agents). This is explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance, not inference.

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.

Resources