HumanMirror One
Server Details
One MCP tool for verified AI-agent outcomes with success-only charging.
Glama couldn't complete the latest health check. If this server requires authentication, missing or expired test credentials may be the cause. A test profile lets Glama authenticate for health checks and discover tools; it is separate from your personal connections.
If you are the author, claim ownership, then add or update a test profile under Admin → Test Profile.
- Status
- Unhealthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP · MCP 2025-06-18
- URL
TDQS
Scored across 1 tool
With only one tool available, there is no possibility of confusing it with other tools. The tool's purpose is clear and it stands alone without overlap.
The single tool name follows a predictable prefix_verb pattern (humanmirror_do). Since there is only one tool, naming consistency is trivially high and there are no conflicting conventions.
A single tool is too few for a server, even if that tool is a general-purpose executor. The server would need additional tools to handle a meaningful range of operations, making the count feel inadequate for most use cases.
The single tool provides no structured domain surface, no CRUD coverage, and no auxiliary operations. It is a catch-all executor, so any specific workflow requiring multiple steps or different resource types would be severely underserved.
Available Tools
1 toolhumanmirror_doDInspect
One HumanMirror tool for measurable deterministic outcomes. Set dry_run=true for a free quote. Otherwise HumanMirror executes and independently verifies the result; 6 Nexus credits are kept only on verified success and refunded on execution or verification failure.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| input | Yes | JSON input for the requested result. | |
| dry_run | No | When true, return a free quote and do not reserve or consume credits. | |
| options | No | Optional operation-specific settings. | |
| criteria | No | Optional measurable success thresholds. | |
| objective | No | Natural-language measurable objective, for example: remove duplicate records and prove none remain. | |
| contract_id | No | Optional Outcome contract ID returned by a dry run. | |
| outcome_type | No | Optional explicit Outcome type: clean_json, deduplicate_records, normalize_entity, data_quality_at_least, detect_anomalies, no_secrets, output_quality, schema_compatible, safe_preflight, execution_receipt. |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses the credit/refund model and dry-run behavior, but it does not mention side effects, data modifications, permissions, or failure modes beyond the generic refund statement.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is brief and mostly free of redundant detail. However, the opening phrase 'One HumanMirror tool for measurable deterministic outcomes' is vague filler, though it does not significantly bloat the text.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With no output schema and no sibling context, the description leaves important gaps: it does not explain what a successful response looks like, how contract_id is used beyond being returned by a dry run, or how criteria and objective interact. The outcome_type list helps but the overall execution model remains underspecified.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is complete, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a useful enum list for outcome_type and an example for objective, but most parameter descriptions are generic and add little beyond the schema itself.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description does not state a concrete operation or resource; 'One HumanMirror tool for measurable deterministic outcomes' is generic and fails to explain what the tool actually does. It mentions executing and verifying but never names the specific task or domain.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives, and no sibling tools are listed. The only usage hint is the dry_run option for a free quote, but there is no explanation of appropriate scenarios or prerequisites.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Tool Schema Changelog
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
1 tool update
- First observed
humanmirror_do
Related MCP Connectors
Verified 2-3 step AI-agent missions with whole-transaction success-only charging.
Pay-per-use tool marketplace for AI agents. Search, price-check, and call APIs via MCP.
Give AI agents identity, permissions, and reusable proof through one MCP.
The OpenRouter for tools. One MCP connection gives any AI agent 254 hosted tools, pay per call.
Related MCP Servers
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenancePay-per-use tool marketplace for AI agents. Search, price-check, and call APIs via MCP.-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceA universal MCP hub that connects any AI agent to any tool, enabling agent interoperability with 50+ pre-built tools, custom tool creation, and tool discovery.594 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceMCP server for AgentPay — the payment gateway for autonomous AI agents. Fund a wallet once, give your agent the key, and it discovers, provisions, and pays for tool APIs on its own. One key, every tool.112 npm1MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceAn agent-callable MCP server that lets autonomous AI agents find, verify, message, schedule with, and transact with small and mid-sized businesses through a single compliance-enforced tool surface.MIT
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.