Skip to main content
Glama

Negotiation fairness check

wever_negotiation-fairness-check
Read-only

Agent Negotiation: submit the two parties and the agreed or proposed clauses, each with its kind (a penalty, an exit right, a cost, liability, an indemnity, a payment or other), the party it binds or charges, the party that holds its right, for a cost the party that controls whether it arises, and any cap. The signed report gives the balance of each kind of clause between the two sides, and names every penalty that binds one side only, exit rights only one side holds and every cost charged to the side that does not control it, then liability, a liability cap or an indemnity on one side only, with the fix for each. Liability for agent error between an operator and a seller is wever_liability-terms-check, a checkout’s refund terms are wever_refund-rule-check and a service’s terms from the paying side are wever_service-terms-check. Verdict one_sided, balance_gaps, balance_unverified or balanced. POST /api/negotiation-fairness-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-negotiation-contract. Human page: https://weverlabs.com/agent-negotiation/.

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": {
      "parties": "<parties>",
      "clauses": "<clauses>"
    },
    "name": "wever_negotiation-fairness-check"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
labelNoOptional name recorded in the report.
clausesYes
partiesYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnly/openWorld false/destructive false), the description discloses the full cost and auth model: 0.10 USDC per call on Base via x402 exact, ten signed-wallet free calls per rolling 30 days, and X-Wever-Wallet-Proof bound to the exact JSON arguments and route. It also states the read-only blast radius concretely ('no network request, fetch, money movement, message, sharing, configuration change or external write') and that the return carries an Ed25519 signed receipt — well past what annotations supply.

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?

Front-loaded with the submission shape and the report contents, followed by routing, verdicts, endpoint, safety, payment, and links — a sensible order. The middle sentence is a dense run-on enumerating clause kinds that partly repeats the schema enum, and the contract/human-page URLs are boilerplate, but nothing is truly wasted for an agent deciding how to call this.

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?

With no output schema, the description still tells the agent what comes back: per-kind balance between the two sides, the enumerated one-sided defects (penalties, exit rights, uncontrolled costs, liability/cap/indemnity on one side only) each with a fix, and the four verdict values. Auth, cost, side-effect profile, and endpoint are all present, so nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is only 33%, so the description carries real weight — and it does, explaining the role of each clause field in plain language: kind, the party it 'binds or charges' (bears), the party that 'holds its right' (holds), the party that 'controls whether it arises' (controlled_by), and any cap. The two-party constraint on parties is stated explicitly; only the optional label is left to the schema, which already documents it.

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 description opens with a specific verb and resource ('submit the two parties and the agreed or proposed clauses' to produce a signed fairness report) and immediately states what the report contains. It also names the exact sibling tools it is not (wever_liability-terms-check, wever_refund-rule-check, wever_service-terms-check), so an agent can separate it from the negotiation-* and terms-check family 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?

Routing is explicit: liability for agent error between operator and seller goes to wever_liability-terms-check, checkout refund terms to wever_refund-rule-check, and a service's terms from the paying side to wever_service-terms-check. The remaining case, a two-sided clause balance between two parties, is what this tool covers, so both when-to-use and when-not-to-use are derivable from the text itself.

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