Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Proof Holdings

by holdings.proof
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

list_assets

Read-only

List all verified assets for the authenticated user. Assets are verified identities (phones, emails, domains).

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": "list_assets"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeNoFilter by asset type
statusNoFilter by status

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / limit
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Items per page",
-  "maximum": 100,
-  "minimum": 1,
-  "type": "integer"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / page
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Page number",
-  "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
-  "maximum": 9007199254740991,
-  "type": "integer"
-}
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": {},
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": {},
+        "properties": {
+          "channel": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "created_at": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "has_proof": {
+            "type": "boolean"
+          },
+          "id": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "identifier": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "metadata": {
+            "additionalProperties": {},
+            "properties": {},
+            "type": "object"
+          },
+          "proof_expires_at": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "proof_id": {
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "proof_status": {
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "proof_token": {
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "status": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "verified_at": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "id",
+          "type",
+          "channel",
+          "identifier",
+          "status",
+          "proof_expires_at",
+          "created_at"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "data"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / properties / page / maximum
      Added value: +9007199254740991
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

readOnlyHint already declares a safe read, so the description's job is extra context, and it delivers: an auth gate plus the specific failure mode where a successful start_login still leaves this tool inaccessible. It omits result ordering/pagination and whether filters can be combined.

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?

Two short blocks: what it lists, then the access requirement, with the disambiguation warning front-loaded. No filler sentences and no repetition of schema content.

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?

Output schema exists, both parameters are documented, and the auth prerequisite is spelled out, so an agent has what it needs to call it. The only residual gap is behavioral detail like pagination or ordering, which is minor for a simple read.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100% with enums on both filter parameters, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds only the implicit constraint that results are limited to verified assets, with no explanation of how type and status interact.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('List all verified assets') and defines what an asset is ('verified identities (phones, emails, domains)'), which an agent cannot get from the name alone. It stops short of naming how it differs from the specialized siblings list_phones, list_emails, list_domains, and the enumerated examples omit social/wallet that the schema allows.

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 a concrete prerequisite path (needs a Proof account, authenticate the client, retry) and explicitly rules out the wrong route: 'start_login does NOT open this tool.' It does not say when to prefer this over the narrower list_phones/list_domains tools, leaving that inference to the agent.

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