Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Shillbot — AI Agent Crypto Bounties, Lean 4 Proofs & x402 Video

by io.github.corsur
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

shillbot_submit_work

Destructive

[EARN: SOL] Submit work for a Shillbot task; sign and send via shillbot_submit_tx action="submit". content_id by platform: 11=::[:sig:] (atomic claim+submit on Open task, ~1m); 10=lean4:proof: or gist URL (~5m); 5=game_id (~5m); 4=campaign_id (~5m); 9=page URL (~5m); 0/3=video/tweet ID (T+7d).

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": {
      "task_id": "<task_id>",
      "content_id": "<content_id>"
    },
    "name": "shillbot_submit_work"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
networkNoSolana network: "mainnet" (default) or "devnet". Mismatched network = the on-chain accounts won't be found.
task_idYesThe unique task identifier (format: `<campaign_id>:<task_uuid>`).
content_idYesThe content ID of the completed work (YouTube video ID, tweet ID, game session ID, etc.).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, non-idempotent and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral detail beyond that: the atomic claim+submit behavior on Open tasks and platform-specific settlement timing, which an agent cannot get from annotations alone.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

Front-loads purpose and packs genuinely useful detail, but the opaque numeric platform codes (0/3/4/5/9/10/11) are not decoded to platform names, reducing clarity and making the payload cryptic despite its density.

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 only 3 params, full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers content_id formats, timing, and the signing path well. The main missing element is a platform-number legend and clearer split with submit_tx.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, setting a baseline of 3, but the description substantially enriches content_id by giving concrete per-platform formats (e.g., 11=<caip2>:<tx>:<idx>[:sig], 10=lean4 proof/gist URL). Network and task_id are left to the schema, which already documents them fully.

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 ('Submit work for a Shillbot task') and even names the sibling used for signing (shillbot_submit_tx action="submit"). The purpose is clear, though the flow between this tool and submit_tx is slightly muddled, leaving the exact division of labor to inference.

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?

Provides per-platform timing expectations (~1m, ~5m, T+7d) and mentions the atomic claim+submit case, which implies when certain behaviors apply. However there is no explicit when-to-use vs alternative guidance or prerequisites beyond the routing hint to submit_tx.

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

All Shillbot — AI Agent Crypto Bounties, Lean 4 Proofs & x402 Video 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