Verify-api

verify_ai_claim

Read-onlyIdempotent

Verify whether an AI model, API provider, pricing claim, or infrastructure assertion is true today using live web evidence. Returns deterministic verdicts (TRUE, FALSE, PARTIALLY_TRUE, UNREACHABLE, UNVERIFIED) with cited sources and confidence scores. Requires x402 micropayment (0.01 USDC on Base).

When to use: Fact-checking an AI provider's claims, pricing, or model availability. When NOT to use: Do NOT use for general open-ended web search, coding assistance, or non-AI claim verification.

Parameters:

query (string, required): The exact claim or assertion to verify (5-500 chars), e.g. 'Is GLM-5.3 Flash free on ZenMux?'.
depth (string, optional, default 'standard'): Verification depth. 'standard' executes fast single-pass search (0.01 USDC); 'deep' conducts multi-source cross-examination (0.03 USDC).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`depth`	No	Verification depth: 'standard' (0.01 USDC) or 'deep' (0.03 USDC).	standard
`query`	Yes	The specific AI infrastructure claim or assertion to verify.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	No	Unique verification record ID
`answer`	Yes	Detailed explanation backed by fresh sources
`sources`	Yes	Fresh evidence sources used for verification
`verdict`	Yes	Deterministic evidence-backed verdict
`confidence`	Yes	Confidence score between 0.0 and 1.0

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 25, 2026
- addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```

Changed5 schema fields changedSep 19, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / depth / examples
```
Added value: +[
+  "standard",
+  "deep"
+]
```

changedInput schema / properties / query / description

Previous value: -"The specific AI infrastructure claim or assertion to verify (e.g., 'Is GLM-5.3 Flash free on ZenMux?')."New value: +"The specific AI infrastructure claim or assertion to verify."

addedInput schema / properties / query / examples

Added value: +[
+  "Is GLM-5.3 Flash free on ZenMux?",
+  "Does OpenRouter still offer free tier models?"
+]

addedInput schema / properties / query / maxLength
```
Added value: +500
```
addedInput schema / properties / query / minLength
```
Added value: +5
```

Changed1 schema field changedSep 19, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / depth / default
```
Added value: +"standard"
```

Changed3 schema fields changedSep 19, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / depth

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Verification depth: 'standard' (0.01 USDC) or 'deep' (0.03 USDC).",
+  "enum": [
+    "standard",
+    "deep"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / query / description

Added value: +"The specific AI infrastructure claim or assertion to verify (e.g., 'Is GLM-5.3 Flash free on ZenMux?')."

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "answer": {
+      "description": "Detailed explanation backed by fresh sources",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "confidence": {
+      "description": "Confidence score between 0.0 and 1.0",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "id": {
+      "description": "Unique verification record ID",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "sources": {
+      "description": "Fresh evidence sources used for verification",
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "title": {
+            "description": "Source page title",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": {
+            "description": "Source type (official, third_party, community)",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "url": {
+            "description": "Source URL",
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "verdict": {
+      "description": "Deterministic evidence-backed verdict",
+      "enum": [
+        "TRUE",
+        "FALSE",
+        "PARTIALLY_TRUE",
+        "CHANGED",
+        "UNREACHABLE",
+        "BLOCKED",
+        "UNVERIFIED"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "verdict",
+    "answer",
+    "confidence",
+    "sources"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 18, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond those: it requires an x402 micropayment, returns validated verdicts with cited sources and confidence scores, and distinguishes standard vs deep verification costs. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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 description is well-structured with a clear purpose statement, explicit usage guidance, and a parameter breakdown. It is not overly verbose, though the parameter section partially duplicates the input schema. The most important differentiators, cost and when-not-to-use, are prominently placed.

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 the tool's simplicity, two parameters, and presence of an output schema, the description covers all essential context: purpose, scope, exclusions, cost, verdict types, and parameter depth behavior. The output schema handles return-value details, so no critical information is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds some value by explaining depth behavior as 'fast single-pass search' vs 'multi-source cross-examination' and explicitly tying costs to each depth level. The query parameter guidance is useful but largely mirrors the schema's existing description.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Verify whether an AI model, API provider, pricing claim, or infrastructure assertion is true today using live web evidence.' It also lists deterministic verdicts and clearly separates this tool from general web search, making it distinguishable from siblings like search_web.

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?

The description explicitly provides 'When to use' and 'When NOT to use' guidance, including exclusions for general open-ended web search, coding assistance, and non-AI claims. It stops short of naming a specific sibling tool to use instead, such as search_web, so it is clear but not fully alternative-aware.

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

All Verify-api 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.

Resources

Need Help?