vealth

Where your credential record stands

credential_record_status

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read the credential records for one wallet: for each, the credential, the issuer, and whether it is pending (waiting for a person to check it), verified (a person read the issuer's public lookup, with the date and the page), not found, or run out. Only a verified record inside its dates opens a credentialed job. Free, keyless, no wallet needed, just the address; it shows no certificate number and no name. Cost and signer: free and keyless, nothing to sign.

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": {
      "wallet": "<wallet>"
    },
    "name": "credential_record_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`wallet`	Yes	The 0x… address to read. Address only, never a private key.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ok`	No
`tool`	No
`funded`	No
`payUsd`	No
`workId`	No
`claimId`	No
`claimable`	No
`next_call`	No
`proofRule`	No
`fulfillableBy`	No
`definitionOfDone`	No
`needs_from_caller`	No
`notClaimableReason`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 4, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, yet the description still adds real context: it is free and keyless, needs no wallet and nothing to sign, and deliberately withholds certificate number and name. That privacy footprint and cost profile are not in 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.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The status enumeration and the 'verified record opens a job' clause are front-loaded and useful, but the cost/signer facts are stated twice — once as 'Free, keyless, no wallet needed, just the address' and again as 'Cost and signer: free and keyless, nothing to sign.' That duplication costs a sentence without adding meaning.

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?

For a one-parameter read tool with an output schema and full annotation coverage, the description covers what is returned, what the status values mean, and what the call requires. The only gap is the absence of routing guidance against the prepare/submit credential siblings.

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?

With a single parameter at 100% schema description coverage, the schema already says 'The 0x… address to read. Address only, never a private key.' The description's 'just the address' restates that without adding format, chain, or validation detail, so the 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('read the credential records for one wallet') and enumerates what comes back: the credential, the issuer, and a status of pending/verified/not found/run out. The read-only framing implicitly separates it from the sibling prepare_credential_record and submit_credential_record pair, though it never names them.

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?

It explains the consequence of the data ('only a verified record inside its dates opens a credentialed job'), which tells the agent why to call it, but never says when to prefer this over prepare_credential_record or submit_credential_record, nor what to do if no record exists. Usage is implied rather than routed.

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

All vealth 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.

Resources

Need Help?