Privi Quantum

Dream Weaver: race a quantum job across realms

dreamweaver_run

Run one quantum optimization on several realms at once and return the winning answer, every realm's timing, and a post-quantum signed attestation (Ed25519 + ML-DSA-87) anchored on chain. Paid per call via x402 when payments are on (see quantum_pricing).

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": {
      "problem": "<problem>",
      "data": "<data>"
    },
    "name": "dreamweaver_run"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes	Problem data in the shape quantum_problems describes
`mode`	No	first = fastest valid answer wins; best = best answer by the deadline	first
`shots`	No	Measurements (1-100000)
`fanout`	No	How many realms to use (1-8), fastest first
`layers`	No	QAOA depth p (1-4)
`realms`	No	Only these realm_ids (from privilege_directory)
`problem`	Yes	balance_lines \| select_lots \| split_conflicts \| qubo (see quantum_problems)
`hedge_ms`	No	first mode: start the top realm alone, add the others after this many ms (or as soon as one fails). 0 = all at once
`deadline_s`	No	Give up after this many seconds (1-120)
`privi_pass`	No	Your Privi pass (ppass_...) from inspector_pass; the quantum realm requires one

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 27, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / privi_pass

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Your Privi pass (ppass_...) from inspector_pass; the quantum realm requires one",
+  "title": "Privi Pass"
+}

AddedOct 27, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the agent knows this is a non-idempotent mutating call. The description adds genuinely new behavioral facts — per-call x402 billing and an on-chain anchored Ed25519 + ML-DSA-87 attestation — but says nothing about what happens on partial realm failure, whether failed races are still billed, or rate limits.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

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

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and its scope before the return payload and billing caveat. Jargon density (x402, ML-DSA-87) is high but each clause carries information; nothing is redundant with the title.

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 10 parameters, a nested data object, and no output schema, the description does the important work of describing the return payload (winning answer, timings, attestation) and the cost model. It falls short on error/partial-failure semantics and on the prerequisite chain for privi_pass, which the schema gestures at but the description never reinforces.

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 description coverage is 100% and every parameter, including mode, fanout, hedge_ms, and privi_pass, is documented in the schema itself. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond noting the multi-realm nature, so the baseline of 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 ('Run one quantum optimization') plus a distinguishing scope ('on several realms at once') and enumerates the return payload (winning answer, per-realm timing, signed attestation). An agent can separate it from single-shot siblings like quantum_optimize, but the description never names that sibling explicitly, leaving the differentiation implicit.

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?

Implied usage is clear from the multi-realm framing and the payment note ('paid per call via x402 when payments are on (see quantum_pricing)'), which is useful routing to a pricing sibling. However, there is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over quantum_optimize, dreamscape_submit, or quantum_run_circuit, and no guidance on the first vs. best mode tradeoff beyond what the schema already says.

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

All Privi Quantum 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.