Proof Holdings

create_multi_channel_verification

Create a multi-channel phone verification: one phone number challenged over several channels at once (OR / first-wins). The first channel the user completes wins, yields a single proof token, and cancels the losing siblings. Exactly one proof is billed, at the winning channel's completion — not one per channel, and nothing at creation.

Agent usage: the response includes a group_id (format vg_) and a channels array — each block carries a deep_link (WhatsApp/Telegram) or an sms_message to present to the user — pass the deep_link to render_auth_link. A block's qr_text is that same link already rendered as QR art, not an alternative address: print it verbatim inside a fenced code block or leave it out. Poll get_multi_channel_verification_status with the group_id to track completion and retrieve the proof token when a channel verifies.

The user does not see tool results — most clients fold them away, render_auth_link's output included. Before you wait or poll, put what the user must act on into your own reply text: the link itself (not a sentence announcing it), the SMS text and number, or a note to check their inbox.

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

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": {
      "type": "<type>",
      "identifier": "<identifier>",
      "channels": "<channels>"
    },
    "name": "create_multi_channel_verification"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`type`	Yes	Asset type — only "phone" is supported
`channels`	Yes	1-4 unique channels attempted in parallel (first to complete wins)
`identifier`	Yes	Phone number in E.164 format
`profile_id`	No	Sub-account whose name and templates the request uses; omitted: the key's sub-account, else the primary
`client_metadata`	No	Your own key-value data, stored with the request
`external_user_id`	No	Your application user ID for grouping verifications
`proof_expiry_days`	No	Per-request proof expiry override in days (1-365)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`type`	No
`status`	No	Current status of the verification
`channels`	No
`group_id`	No	Verification group ID (vg_ prefix)
`created_at`	No
`expires_at`	No	When every channel challenge expires
`identifier`	No
`client_metadata`	No
`external_user_id`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedNov 2, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / profile_id / description

Previous value: -"Sub-account (project) whose name and templates the request uses; omitted: the key's project, else the primary"New value: +"Sub-account whose name and templates the request uses; omitted: the key's sub-account, else the primary"

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": {},
+  "properties": {
+    "channels": {},
+    "client_metadata": {},
+    "created_at": {},
+    "expires_at": {
+      "description": "When every channel challenge expires"
+    },
+    "external_user_id": {},
+    "group_id": {
+      "description": "Verification group ID (vg_ prefix)"
+    },
+    "identifier": {},
+    "status": {
+      "description": "Current status of the verification"
+    },
+    "type": {}
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed5 schema fields changedOct 26, 2026

removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
removedInput schema / properties / client_metadata / additionalProperties / type
```
Removed value: -"string"
```

changedInput schema / properties / client_metadata / description

Previous value: -"Custom key-value metadata"New value: +"Your own key-value data, stored with the request"

addedInput schema / properties / client_metadata / propertyNames
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```

addedInput schema / properties / profile_id

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Sub-account (project) whose name and templates the request uses; omitted: the key's project, else the primary",
+  "pattern": "^[0-9a-fA-F]{24}$",
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedSep 19, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well past the annotations by disclosing billing semantics (exactly one proof billed, at the winning channel's completion, nothing at creation) and the side effect that losing channels are cancelled on first completion. It also states the Proof-account auth prerequisite and the exact remediation path. Fully consistent with readOnlyHint=false.

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?

The purpose and the first-wins semantics are front-loaded, and the agent-usage and auth paragraphs are actionable rather than filler. It runs long across four paragraphs, but nearly every sentence carries a decision the agent must make (render vs. print qr_text, don't just announce the link, re-authenticate first).

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?

For a 7-parameter creation tool with an output schema, this covers the full lifecycle an agent needs: creation semantics, response fields, rendering rules, polling path, cost model, and auth failure recovery. The note that clients fold away tool results and the agent must surface the link in its own reply is exactly the kind of thing that prevents silent failures.

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 schema carries the load, but the description still adds real meaning for the channels parameter: first-wins OR semantics, and which channel types yield a deep_link versus an sms_message. It also clarifies that qr_text is the same link rendered as QR art rather than a different address.

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 and resource ('Create a multi-channel phone verification') and immediately pins down the mechanism: one phone number challenged over several channels, OR/first-wins. That scope statement is what separates it from the single-channel sibling create_verification, so an agent can pick without opening the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives concrete follow-up routing: pass the returned deep_link to render_auth_link, and poll get_multi_channel_verification_status with the group_id. It also warns that start_login does NOT open this tool. What's missing is an explicit rule for when to prefer the plain create_verification sibling over this multi-channel one.

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

All Proof Holdings 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.