Skip to main content
Glama

MolTrust MCP Server

by io.github.MoltyCel
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

mt_issue_music_credential

Issue a VerifiedMusicCredential for an AI-generated music track.

Creates a W3C Verifiable Credential proving the provenance of an
AI-generated music track — which tool created it, whether a human
was involved, and what rights apply. Anchored on Base L2.
EU AI Act Article 50(2) compliant.

Args:
    agent_did: DID of the agent/creator (e.g. "did:moltrust:abc123")
    tool: AI tool used (e.g. "Suno API v3.2", "Udio", "Magenta")
    human_oversight: "true", "false", or "partial"
    rights: Rights declaration (e.g. "CC-BY", "All Rights Reserved", "Agent-Wallet")
    track_title: Title of the track
    track_description: Optional description
    genre: Optional genre (e.g. "ambient", "jazz", "classical")
    isrc: Optional ISRC code (ISO 3901)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
isrcNo
toolYes
genreNo
rightsYes
agent_didYes
track_titleYes
human_oversightYes
track_descriptionNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose that it creates a W3C Verifiable Credential, anchors on Base L2, and is EU AI Act compliant. However, it does not describe side effects (e.g., cost, storage, reversibility), failure modes, or permissions required. It gives some behavioral context but lacks depth.

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: a concise one-line summary followed by a brief explanation and a formatted Args list. The main purpose is front-loaded. The Args block is easy to scan and avoids unnecessary prose. It is appropriately sized for an 8-parameter tool.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (8 params, 5 required) and lack of annotations, the description covers all parameters with examples, mentions the compliance context (EU AI Act) and anchoring (Base L2). It does not explain the return value, but an output schema exists, so that may be covered elsewhere. Overall, it provides sufficient context for an agent to call it correctly.

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 description's Args section adds significant meaning beyond the input schema. It provides examples for each parameter (e.g., 'Suno API v3.2', 'true/false/partial' for human_oversight, 'CC-BY' for rights) and clarifies the format. Schema coverage is 0%, but the description compensates effectively, making parameter usage clear.

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 clearly states it 'Issue a VerifiedMusicCredential for an AI-generated music track' with a specific verb and resource. It also explains the purpose (provenance, rights, compliance) but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling issue tools like mt_shopping_issue_vc or mt_skill_issue_vc, though the domain (music) is explicit.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies when to use it (to create a credential for a music track) but does not mention alternatives or exclusions. For example, it does not say 'use mt_verify_music_credential to verify' or provide context on when not to use this tool. The usage is implied by the verb 'Issue' and the domain, but not explicitly guided.

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

All MolTrust MCP Server 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