gov_ai_verify_exportCheck that a published AI inventory file is exactly what the agency exported from Privi Ledger, and return its on-chain seal. Free; no key needed.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| csv_text | Yes | The exact CSV file contents as published |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description adds critical behavioral context: it specifies the output (returning its on-chain seal) and practical constraints (
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The definition is highly concise, front-loading the verification goal, detailing the specific return type, and concluding with essential operational information (cost and key requirements. Every sentence earns its place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Despite lacking an output schema, the description is complete by explicitly stating what the tool returns: 'its on-chain seal.' This addresses the functionality and constraints thoroughly for a single-input, read-only verification tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Although the schema provides 100% coverage, the description reinforces the parameter's meaning by clarifying that the `csv_text` must be 'exactly what the agency exported from Privi Ledger.' This adds vital context about the required input state.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the specific action (Check/Verify) and the resource (published AI inventory file). It specifies the condition for the check (exactly what was exported from Privi Ledger) and distinguishes itself by focusing on returning the on-chain seal, differentiating it from general inventory tools.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
While it does not explicitly name sibling tools, its highly specific purpose—verifying the authenticity and obtaining the on-chain seal—provides a very strong guideline for when this tool should be used, implicitly guiding the agent away from general inventory operations.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.