VolatiAI MCP

by io.github.christianscode1994

get_anchor

Return anchor-log status for a snapshot date: was an anchor entry recorded, what was the file SHA-256 at anchor time vs now, is a FreeTSA .tsr present. Detects post-hoc rewrites that signature verification alone cannot.

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": {
      "date": "<date>"
    },
    "name": "get_anchor"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`date`	Yes	Snapshot date YYYY-MM-DD.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the main status components returned and the diagnostic value regarding post-hoc rewrites, but it does not state permissions, missing-anchor behavior, error handling, or explicitly affirm that the operation is read-only.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core action and resource, then lists the status checks compactly. Every sentence adds useful information without filler.

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 a simple one-parameter status tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains what is checked and why it matters. It could be more complete by describing missing-anchor or error behavior, but it gives enough context to call the tool 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 the schema already documents the single date parameter including its YYYY-MM-DD format. The description adds only that the date is a snapshot date, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: return anchor-log status for a snapshot date, and it lists the concrete checks it performs. It does not explicitly name or differentiate itself from siblings such as verify_snapshot, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

Usage is implied by the stated purpose and by 'Detects post-hoc rewrites that signature verification alone cannot,' which suggests when the result is useful. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or named alternative for the agent to choose between this and sibling tools.

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

All VolatiAI MCP 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.