vealth

Submit the signed pledge (step 2 of 2)

submit_backing

Complete the pledge: pass workId, the BODY_JSON from prepare_backing UNCHANGED, and the signature your wallet produced over MESSAGE_TO_SIGN. This server relays the signed request to the same public pledge gate any HTTP client uses — it holds no keys and no funds, and without your signature it can do nothing. Free, always: no fee is ever charged for a validly signed pledge. Returns whether your wallet's balance verified against the pledged amount, and the packet's current backer ledger. Cost and signer: free, no gas; signed by the person's own wallet or passkey, and the house never holds a key.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`workId`	Yes	The packet id.
`bodyJson`	Yes	The exact BODY_JSON string from prepare_backing, unchanged.
`signature`	Yes	The 0x… personal_sign output over MESSAGE_TO_SIGN.

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.

Changed2 schema fields changedAug 26, 2026
- addedOutput schema / properties / claimable
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / notClaimableReason
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```

Changed1 schema field changedAug 18, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "claimId": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "definitionOfDone": {
+      "type": [
+        "object",
+        "array",
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "fulfillableBy": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "funded": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "needs_from_caller": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "next_call": {
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "ok": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "payUsd": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "proofRule": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "tool": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "workId": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

AddedAug 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only give readOnly=false, openWorld=true, idempotent=false, destructive=false; the description adds the trust model (server holds no keys and no funds, relays to the same public gate any HTTP client uses), the cost profile (free, no gas, never a fee), and who signs (user's own wallet or passkey). That is substantial behavior disclosure beyond 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 critical instructions and the no-keys trust model are front-loaded, but the cost message is stated twice ('Free, always: no fee is ever charged…' then 'Cost and signer: free, no gas'), and the closing sentence repeats signing/key custody already covered. The redundancy costs it a point.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need only a pointer — the description supplies one (balance verification plus backer ledger). Combined with full parameter coverage, annotations, and the stated prerequisite chain, an agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly.

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 coverage is 100% and already documents all three parameters, including 'the exact BODY_JSON string from prepare_backing, unchanged'. The description restates the same constraint (UNCHANGED, signature over MESSAGE_TO_SIGN) rather than adding new format 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.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource ('Complete the pledge'), names the three inputs it consumes, and ties itself explicitly to prepare_backing as 'step 2 of 2'. An agent can identify this as the signing/relay half of a two-step flow without opening any schema.

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?

It clearly establishes the precondition — BODY_JSON must come from prepare_backing and be passed UNCHANGED, and the signature must be over MESSAGE_TO_SIGN — which effectively says 'use this only after prepare_backing and wallet signing'. It does not name alternatives or state when NOT to use it, so it falls short of the explicit when/when-not/alternative bar.

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?