Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Flux Cloud

by io.github.RunOnFlux
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Generate a new Flux ID and payment key pair

flux_generate_keys
Read-only

Creates two fresh private keys (WIF): one for the Flux ID that will own apps, one for the address that pays. The response contains the secrets; store them in the MCP server environment as FLUX_ID_PRIVATE_KEY and FLUX_PAYMENT_PRIVATE_KEY, then restart the server. Nothing is stored or sent anywhere by 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": "flux_generate_keys"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fluxIdPrivateKeyNoWIF private key of the Flux ID that owns the app. Use a dedicated key from flux_generate_keys, never a main wallet key.
paymentPrivateKeyNoWIF private key of the Flux address that pays. Fund it with only what you intend to spend.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Discloses that secrets are returned, that nothing is stored or sent elsewhere, and how to persist them. This adds significant value beyond the readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations.

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?

Three tight sentences: what it creates, what to do with the result, and the security guarantee. Front-loaded and no filler.

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 no output schema, the description explains the return (secrets) and required post-actions, and it covers security behavior. It is complete for a key-generation tool.

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

Parameters5/5

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

The schema covers parameters at 100% and describes them well, but the description reinforces intended use (dedicated key, fund only what you intend to spend) and the schema actually resembles the output rather than input—still, the description clarifies the output secrets.

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?

States a specific action: creates two fresh WIF private keys, one for Flux ID and one for payment address. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like flux_get_identity or flux_deploy_app.

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?

Explains the post-generation workflow (store in environment variables, restart server) but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state when not to use it.

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

All Flux Cloud 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