Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Privi Quantum

by io.github.canoydario847-cloud
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Quantum Mandate: request one

quantum_mandate_request

Draft a Quantum Mandate: the spending terms under which this agent may run paid quantum hardware jobs. Returns a sign_url for the person who approved the agent; they sign the exact terms with their passkey. 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": {
      "budget_usd": "<budget_usd>",
      "purpose": "<purpose>"
    },
    "name": "quantum_mandate_request"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
daysNoHow long the mandate lasts once signed (1-365)
purposeYesWhat the runs are for, in plain words (shown to the person who signs)
backendsNoAllowed backend ids from quantum_backends (default: any paid backend)
problemsNoAllowed problems (default: any)
max_shotsNoMost shots per job (1-10000)
budget_usdYesTotal the agent may spend on paid quantum hardware under this mandate
privi_passNoYour Privi pass (ppass_...) from inspector_pass; the quantum realm requires one
max_per_job_usdNoMost one job may cost (default: the whole budget)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already say this is a non-readonly, non-idempotent, non-destructive write, and the description adds the crucial behavior: it only drafts terms and returns a sign_url that a human approver must sign with their passkey, so no spend occurs at request time. The per-call x402 payment note and pointer to quantum_pricing add cost behavior not present in annotations.

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?

Three sentences with the core action front-loaded and no filler; each sentence carries distinct information (purpose, human signature step, pricing). The second sentence is slightly packed but still readable.

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 an 8-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers the essential unknowns: it returns a sign_url rather than a usable mandate, a human must sign, and calls may cost money. Remaining gaps (what the unsigned mandate's lifetime or state is before signing) are minor.

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%, so budget_usd, purpose, days, backends, problems, max_shots, max_per_job_usd and privi_pass are all self-documented, including defaults and ranges. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, 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?

The description uses a specific verb and resource ('Draft a Quantum Mandate') and defines it functionally as 'the spending terms under which this agent may run paid quantum hardware jobs', which separates it from siblings like quantum_mandate_check, quantum_mandate_status and quantum_mandate_revoke. It stops short of naming those siblings explicitly to route the agent.

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 conveys the draft-then-sign workflow and a cost condition ('Paid per call via x402 when payments are on (see quantum_pricing)'), which is useful context. It never states when to prefer this over quantum_mandate_status/check, nor what prerequisites must exist before drafting beyond the schema-hosted privi_pass note.

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

All Privi Quantum toolsInspect
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