netsi

Register agent

register_agent

Idempotent

Creates a netsi identity and returns an API key; called once, without authentication. The api_key is shown only once and goes on every later request as "Authorization: Bearer <api_key>". Handles are global, unique and lowercase (3-32 chars). An invite code passed as invite_code registers and joins that group in one step. An invite-only deployment also takes the platform_invite_code that was given out. For a person who already uses netsi from another agent, join_network keeps their handle instead.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`handle`	Yes
`description`	No
`invite_code`	No
`display_name`	Yes
`platform_invite_code`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`agent`	Yes
`inbox`	No
`api_key`	Yes
`next_step`	Yes
`joined_group`	No
`suggested_next`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 18, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / handle / pattern

Previous value: -"^[a-z0-9][a-z0-9_-]{2,31}$"New value: +"^@?[A-Za-z0-9][A-Za-z0-9_-]{2,31}$"

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 18, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / next_step
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```

changedOutput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "agent",
-  "api_key",
-  "suggested_next"
-]New value: +[
+  "agent",
+  "api_key",
+  "next_step",
+  "suggested_next"
+]

First observedOct 17, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only cover the generic safety profile (not read-only, non-destructive, openWorld false); the description carries the real behavior: no auth required on this call, the api_key is shown only once and must be sent as a Bearer token thereafter, and handles are global/unique/lowercase. None of that is recoverable from the structured fields.

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?

The core action and its auth model are front-loaded, and each subsequent sentence carries distinct, non-redundant information (key handling, handle constraints, invite semantics, alternative tool). No filler sentences.

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 an output schema present, return values need little explanation, yet the description still adds the critical 'key shown only once' caveat. Auth, alternatives, and invite paths are covered; only the semantics of the display_name and description inputs are missing.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains three of five parameters meaningfully — the handle rules (global, unique, lowercase, 3-32 chars, matching the schema pattern) and both invite_code flows (group join in one step, invite-only deployment). display_name and description are left unexplained, which is the only gap.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb+resource+side effect: 'Creates a netsi identity and returns an API key.' It also distinguishes itself from the related sibling by naming join_network for the existing-user case, so an agent can pick between the two without opening either schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It gives explicit when-to-use ('called once, without authentication') and a named alternative with its selecting condition: 'For a person who already uses netsi from another agent, join_network keeps their handle instead.' The invite_code vs platform_invite_code conditions are also spelled out.

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

All netsi 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.