Proof Holdings

get_settings

Read-only

Get account settings: the outbound webhook endpoint with its event subscriptions, and the default proof lifetime. Branding (name, logo, colour, email theme, support email) belongs to each sub-account: read it with get_profile. The webhook signing secret is NOT returned to an API key — the response reports webhook.secret_set instead, and the value itself is visible only in the dashboard or in the update_settings response that created or rotated it.

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

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_settings"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`hitl`	No	Approval-setup settings.
`webhook`	No	Outbound webhook configuration — DEPRECATED (#421). An account switched over to webhook endpoints sees its account-wide (`legacy`) endpoint here: `url` is null while that endpoint is disabled, a `url` write updates or creates it, `url: null` disables it (its secret is kept), and `rotate_secret` rotates its secret. An account not yet switched over sees its settings fields, as before. Omitted for an API key bound to one sub-account.
`proof_expiry_days`	No	Default lifetime in days of newly issued verification proofs, or null when the account has never set one. Confirmation-decision proofs do not use it.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 2, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": {},
+  "properties": {
+    "hitl": {
+      "description": "Approval-setup settings."
+    },
+    "proof_expiry_days": {
+      "description": "Default lifetime in days of newly issued verification proofs, or null when the account has never set one. Confirmation-decision proofs do not use it."
+    },
+    "webhook": {
+      "description": "Outbound webhook configuration — DEPRECATED (#421). An account switched over to webhook endpoints sees its account-wide (`legacy`) endpoint here: `url` is null while that endpoint is disabled, a `url` write updates or creates it, `url: null` disables it (its secret is kept), and `rotate_secret` rotates its secret. An account not yet switched over sees its settings fields, as before. Omitted for an API key bound to one sub-account."
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 19, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond readOnlyHint=true, the description discloses important behavioral constraints: authentication with a Proof account is required, start_login does not open this tool, the webhook secret is deliberately not returned to an API key, and the response instead exposes webhook.secret_set. These details materially affect invocation and interpretation of results.

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?

The description is front-loaded with what the tool returns, then handles key disambiguations and authentication. Every sentence carries useful information: the branding boundary, the webhook secret caveat, and the access requirement.

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?

Given a zero-parameter read-only tool with an output schema and readOnlyHint, the description is complete enough for correct invocation. It covers the main return scope, sibling routing, secret-handling behavior, and authentication prerequisites.

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?

The tool has zero input parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to document. Per the baseline for parameterless tools, this scores 4 rather than a higher value.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ("Get account settings") and enumerates the returned account-level fields: outbound webhook endpoint with event subscriptions, and default proof lifetime. It also distinguishes this tool from sibling get_profile by stating that branding belongs to sub-accounts and should be read there.

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?

It gives clear routing guidance: use get_profile for branding, and the webhook signing secret is only visible via the dashboard or an update_settings response. The ACCESS section adds a necessary precondition. However, it does not explicitly frame the general when-to-use case against other settings-related siblings beyond the branding and secret cases.

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.