vealth

Submit the signed token offer (step 2 of 2)

submit_token_offer

Complete the offer: pass workId, the BODY_JSON from prepare_token_offer UNCHANGED, and the signature your wallet produced over MESSAGE_TO_SIGN. Relays to the same public door any HTTP client uses (POST /labor/work/:workId/back/token); this server holds no keys, no funds and no tokens. Free with a valid signature. Returns the recorded offer and the packet's token terms.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

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

Output Schema

TableJSON 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. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

AddedSep 3, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover readOnly=false, non-idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds non-obvious behavioral context: 'this server holds no keys, no funds and no tokens', 'Free with a valid signature', and that it returns the recorded offer and token terms. This goes beyond annotation-only information.

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 focused sentences: the first gives the exact action and inputs, the second explains the relay endpoint and custody model, and the third states cost and return value. No filler or repetition of schema fields.

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 an output schema exists and all parameters are documented, the description supplies all necessary calling context: prerequisite step, exact parameter sourcing, endpoint, cost, custody implications, and return summary. An agent has enough to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

The schema already documents all three parameters at 100% coverage. The description adds crucial semantic guidance by emphasizing that bodyJson must be passed UNCHANGED from prepare_token_offer and by specifying that signature is the 0x… personal_sign output over MESSAGE_TO_SIGN, which adds value beyond the schema descriptions.

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 clearly states a specific verb and resource: 'Complete the offer' by passing workId, bodyJson, and signature. It identifies this as 'step 2 of 2' and references the prerequisite prepare_token_offer, distinguishing it from sibling submit_* tools.

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 description gives clear usage context: use after prepare_token_offer, passing its BODY_JSON unchanged and the wallet signature over MESSAGE_TO_SIGN. It does not explicitly state when not to use it relative to other submit_* siblings, but the step-2 framing makes the workflow position obvious.

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

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Despite 41 tools, each has a highly specific purpose with detailed descriptions that clearly differentiate them. The prepare_/submit_ pairs, domain-specific prefixes (gmx_, regen_), and distinct action types (find, get, verify, etc.) leave little room for confusion. Even closely related tools like funding_quote and prepare_funding or my_work and my_votes are explicitly distinguished.

Naming Consistency3/5

Naming conventions are mixed: some tools use plain nouns (account_statement, board_stats), others use verb_noun patterns (prepare_*, submit_*, get_*), possessive (my_votes, my_work), or descriptive phrases (how_to_claim, retire_and_certify). While not chaotic, the lack of a single consistent pattern reduces predictability. However, prefixes like gmx_ and regen_ provide internal consistency within subdomains.

Tool Count2/5

With 41 tools, the count significantly exceeds the recommended range (3-15) and falls into the 'too many' category (25+). Although the server covers a wide range of features (work lifecycle, Regen governance, GMX trading, anchoring, carbon), this number can overwhelm agents and make selection challenging. A more focused tool set would improve coherence.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers the core workflows for its stated domains well: work posting/funding/claiming/proofing, Regen governance and token data, GMX position management, anchoring, and carbon estimation. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no GMX order cancellation, no work deletion), but overall the surface is comprehensive enough to accomplish primary use cases without dead ends.

Resources

Need Help?