Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

blindoracle

by io.github.craigmbrown
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

delegation.record

Records that the paying agent delegated a task to a named agent: a signed credential (did:web:craigmbrown.com#delegation-1, kind 30014) binding the paying wallet, the delegate, the sha256 of the task, scope, deadline and an optional policy naming the actions the delegate must get a human to confirm first. Returns two one-time tokens, one per party, for the later steps: delegate accept, delivery seal, delegator close. Anyone can verify the chain with craigmbrown.com's DID document. It proves who paid and what was handed over, not either party's off-platform identity or the quality of the work. (x402: $0.10 USDC per call)

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "delegation.record"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
taskNoTask/query text for this SKU

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint false, idempotentHint false, openWorldHint true), and the description meaningfully extends beyond them: it discloses the returned one-time tokens, the per-call x402 price of $0.10 USDC, and the verification path via the issuer's DID document. It also sets an honest scope boundary ('proves who paid and what was handed over, not either party's off-platform identity or the quality of the work'). It does not restate idempotency or what cleanup is needed if a token is lost.

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?

One dense, front-loaded paragraph: what is recorded first, then what is returned, then how to verify, then limits, with cost in a trailing parenthetical. Every sentence contributes and nothing is redundant.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a write operation with no output schema, the description compensates well by describing the return value (two one-time tokens, one per party) and the downstream steps they enable. Combined with the limitations and verification notes, an agent has enough to invoke and reason about results 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% for the single 'task' parameter, so the schema already carries the burden. The description adds only an indirect hint that the task text is hashed into the credential ('the sha256 of the task'), without explaining input format, size limits, or canonicalization.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Records that the paying agent delegated a task to a named agent') and pins down the artifact produced: a signed credential (kind 30014) binding payer, delegate, task hash, scope and deadline. That is clearly distinguishable from siblings like delegation.accept or bundle.delegation-chain.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description places this as the first step in a workflow by naming what follows ('delegate accept, delivery seal, delegator close') and what the returned one-time tokens are for, which implicitly tells an agent to call this before delegation.accept. It stops short of explicit when-not guidance or naming the alternative recording paths, so it is clear context rather than full routing logic.

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

All blindoracle 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