Skip to main content
Glama

Proof Holdings

by holdings.proof
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

create_circle

Create a Circle — a named group of trusted contacts (the people-primitive powering Proof-Me and Approvals-on-Circle). Optionally seed initial members; each member's declared channels are stored so they can be invited to enroll.

Agent usage: after creating a Circle, add members with add_circle_member (or seed them here), then invite_circle_member to mint the enrollment deep link each contact taps to bind their messenger identity.

ACCESS: needs a Proof account. Authenticate this client (Claude Code: /mcp → Authenticate), then call this tool again. start_login does NOT open this tool.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesHuman-readable name for the Circle
membersNoInitial members (name + optional declared channels)
owner_nameNoHow this Circle's members know its owner ("Dad", "Giorgi"). The bots name the owner by it; while it is empty they name nobody — the Circle's name labels the group, never the person. Trimmed by the API; null or an empty value clears it.
profile_idNoPublic profile (sub-account) to bind for branded messages — create-only
proof_me_enabledNoEnable Proof-Me drills for this Circle

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / owner_name
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "maxLength": 100,
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "description": "How this Circle's members know its owner (\"Dad\", \"Giorgi\"). The bots name the owner by it; while it is empty they name nobody — the Circle's name labels the group, never the person. Trimmed by the API; null or an empty value clears it."
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only say readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the description usefully adds the auth requirement/flow and the side effect that declared channels are stored for later enrollment. It does not cover failure modes, rate limits, or idempotency, and the owner_name naming behavior is largely mirrored in the schema, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

Front-loaded with what a Circle is and what the tool does, then a compact 'Agent usage' sequencing block, then access prerequisites. No filler sentences; each line adds routing or prerequisite information.

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 no output schema, the description should ideally say what the call returns (e.g. a circle id needed for subsequent add/invite calls); it only gestures at the follow-up steps without identifying the returned handle. Otherwise it is complete for a 5-param create tool with full schema coverage.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description adds meaning beyond the schema by framing `members` as optional seeding and explaining that declared channels are persisted for enrollment, and it flags `profile_id` semantics (bind for branded messages). It does not clarify whether seeded members auto-receive invites, which would push it higher.

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 a specific verb (Create) and resource (Circle), defines the concept inline (a named group of trusted contacts) and anchors it to the product domain (Proof-Me, Approvals-on-Circle). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like add_circle_member and invite_circle_member, which are named explicitly.

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?

Provides an explicit sequence: create, then add_circle_member (or seed here), then invite_circle_member to mint the enrollment link. It also states the prerequisite (Proof account, authenticate via /mcp) and an exclusion — start_login does NOT open this tool, which prevents the obvious wrong alternative.

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

All Proof Holdings toolsInspect
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