Quesen Deterministic Agent Decision Layer

quesen.validate

Deterministic pre-decision risk validation for autonomous agents. Returns PROCEED / REVIEW / SKIP plus risk_score, confidence, and named conflict triggers. Same input -> same output; every response embeds engine_version + weights + thresholds for full replay.

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": "quesen.validate"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`domain_age_days`	No	Age of the target domain in days.
`engagement_ratio`	No	Engagement ratio in [0, 1].
`client_request_id`	No	Optional caller-side trace id (echoed in response).
`scam_keyword_count`	No	Count of known scam keywords detected.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedJul 18, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses determinism ('Same input -> same output'), replayability via embedded engine_version/weights/thresholds, and the nature of outputs. It does not explicitly state side effects, but 'validation' strongly implies a read-only operation.

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?

Two tight sentences front-load the core purpose and then provide deterministic/replay guarantees. Every sentence adds distinct information, with no filler or repetition.

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?

The description sufficiently explains what the tool returns given there is no output schema: the decision, risk score, confidence, conflict triggers, and replay metadata. It does not cover error behavior or exact response structure, but for a validation tool with all-optional parameters this is a minor gap.

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 the schema fully documents all four parameters. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, which is acceptable but not value-adding; baseline 3 applies.

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?

Description states a clear purpose: deterministic pre-decision risk validation. It also specifies the exact output categories (PROCEED / REVIEW / SKIP) and supporting signals, which differentiates it from siblings like health, report, simulate, and version.

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 phrase 'pre-decision risk validation for autonomous agents' gives a clear usage context: call before making a decision. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when not to use the tool, but the context is strong enough to guide selection.

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

All Quesen Deterministic Agent Decision Layer 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.