Recompute the hash and Merkle fold for one reveal by sequence number. Returns each check result plus the data to re-verify independently on chain
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| seq | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| note | No | ||
| found | Yes | ||
| status | No | ||
| opbnbTx | No | ||
| anchorBscTx | No | ||
| verifyOnChain | No | ||
| hashRecomputes | No | ||
| merkleFoldsToAnchorRoot | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / x-lexicon / bundleSha256Previous value: -"670f7504e3de5031beccee25a2d24e4515f68b893295f6d5b0d3a0665498b2c9"New value: +"25cc80db6d8e9eac73d47a50f7ad6333a21f1972d008a8fed0159de8bfb4b519"Input schema / x-lexicon / bundleSha256Previous value: -"e5b4290024a229f2bdf97f8fc6a0079c3fe13b77267f41fdcffeb8b26aa1c41e"New value: +"670f7504e3de5031beccee25a2d24e4515f68b893295f6d5b0d3a0665498b2c9"Input schema / x-lexicon / versionPrevious value: -"0.1.0"New value: +"0.2.0"Input schema / additionalPropertiesAdded value: +falseInput schema / x-lexicon / bundleSha256Previous value: -"a1c2e10fd3177d6b4d59ca78693e8fb36880165cf0f735f680dd86a510411178"New value: +"e5b4290024a229f2bdf97f8fc6a0079c3fe13b77267f41fdcffeb8b26aa1c41e"Input schema / x-lexicon / bundleSha256Previous value: -"1eeb782ee15fe69fc80776948e0556fa6b795e210e6305935b2c97b73d955cda"New value: +"a1c2e10fd3177d6b4d59ca78693e8fb36880165cf0f735f680dd86a510411178"Input schema / x-lexicon / bundleSha256Previous value: -"c014292cad7497ce9fd68c33345ac32cb42b672c8e77d6c749c26e162cc207e4"New value: +"1eeb782ee15fe69fc80776948e0556fa6b795e210e6305935b2c97b73d955cda"Input schema / x-lexiconAdded value: +{
+ "bundleSha256": "c014292cad7497ce9fd68c33345ac32cb42b672c8e77d6c749c26e162cc207e4",
+ "name": "ChainHelix Agentic Lexicon",
+ "resolve": "lexicon_resolve",
+ "spec": "lexicon_spec",
+ "version": "0.1.0"
+}Input schema / x-vocabAdded value: +{
+ "seq": "agent.seq"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the core behavior: it recomputes hash + Merkle fold and returns 'each check result plus the data to re-verify independently on chain'. That reveals both the operation and the return intent. It omits failure modes, required inputs/permissions, and what 'each check result' comprises.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two tight sentences with no filler, and the operative action is front-loaded in the first clause. Slightly terse given the zero annotation and zero schema coverage, but no wasted words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
An output schema exists, so the description need not fully itemize return values and it briefly summarizes them. Still, with no annotations and a completely undocumented parameter, an agent lacks guidance on prerequisites, the meaning of a failed check, and when this verification is warranted — leaving the definition only just adequate.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 0% — 'seq' is an undocumented number. The description partially compensates by stating it is a 'sequence number' identifying a single reveal, giving the parameter meaning beyond the bare schema. It does not define the numbering scheme, valid range, or uniqueness, so the compensation is only partial.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb (recompute) plus two named resources (hash and Merkle fold) scoped to 'one reveal by sequence number'. An agent can distinguish this from the sibling list_reveals (which enumerates) and from verify_fill/verify_lead_alert (different targets). It stops short of explicitly naming the siblings it differs from, keeping it at a 4.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The phrase 'for one reveal by sequence number' implies single-reveal verification as opposed to bulk listing, which is usable context. However, it never states when to reach for this versus list_reveals or the peer verify_* tools, nor any prerequisite (e.g. needing an existing reveal to exist first). Usage is left to inference.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.