Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Mizan Calibration

by io.github.Allanoo99
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

trust_check

Read-only. Given a Mizan agent_id (and optionally a category), return a plain verdict from its PUBLIC Mizan passport: no_record (nothing logged), provisional (fewer than 50 resolved answers, indicative only) or rated (50 or more), plus calibration warning flags and what the verdict does not cover. It reads existing data and writes nothing. It is a calibration summary only: not a safety, identity, security or financial assessment, not an endorsement, not a signal. Flag thresholds other than the 50-answer gate are QANTS proposals.

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": {
      "agent_id": "<agent_id>"
    },
    "name": "trust_check"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
agent_idYesThe Mizan agent_id to check.
categoryNoOptional. math_crypto, history, science, future_event or trap. Omit for all categories combined.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and largely succeeds: it declares read-only behavior ('writes nothing'), explains the 50-answer gating threshold that determines provisional vs rated, and warns that other flag thresholds are QANTS proposals. It leaves out edge behavior such as what a verdict looks like for an unknown or non-existent agent_id, and any latency or access caveats beyond 'PUBLIC'.

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?

It is front-loaded with 'Read-only' and packs the verdict model, thresholds and disclaimers into a tight block. There is minor redundancy: 'It reads existing data and writes nothing' restates the opening 'Read-only', and the negative list repeats 'not a ... assessment / not an endorsement / not a signal'.

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?

With no output schema, the description correctly spends its words enumerating the possible return verdicts and the presence of calibration warning flags and coverage caveats. Complete enough for an agent to call and interpret it, with the only real gap being failure/not-found behavior for an invalid agent_id.

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%, so both agent_id and category (including the enumerated values and the omit-for-all semantics) are already documented in the schema. The description adds only the surrounding verdict model, not parameter-level meaning, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: given a Mizan agent_id, return a verdict from its PUBLIC passport, with the three verdict values named. It implicitly distinguishes itself from sibling tools (not a signal, calibration only, read-only passport lookup) without naming an alternative, so it falls just short of a 5.

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 tells the agent when the tool applies (to check an agent's calibration record) and, more valuably, when its output must NOT be used: not a safety, identity, security or financial assessment, not an endorsement. It never names a sibling tool to route to instead, so the alternative-selection guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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

All Mizan Calibration 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