Skip to main content
Glama

Vibes-Coded Agent Security and Commerce Tools

vc_idempotency_guard

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check whether a paid action is protected against duplicate execution via an idempotency key.

Use before retrying a payment or other side-effecting call.
Do not use for content fetch — use vc_web_search / vc_page_markdown.
Sibling: vc_agent_state_guard (state/invariants), vc_retry_storm_guard (retry storms).

Auth: X-Vibes-Key or x402 (~$0.02). Advisory only; no local writes.
Returns JSON assessing key presence/durability, or payment_required.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actionNoAction being protected.
durable_storeNoWhere keys are stored (redis, db, etc.), if known.
idempotency_keyYesClient key that should uniquely protect this paid action.
payment_signatureNoOptional x402 PAYMENT-SIGNATURE if not using X-Vibes-Key.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond annotations, the description adds meaningful behavioral context: auth requirements (X-Vibes-Key or x402), approximate cost (~$0.02), advisory-only nature, no local writes, and the return mode (JSON assessing key presence/durability, or payment_required). This substantially expands on the readOnlyHint/idempotentHint annotations without contradicting them.

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 tightly organized: purpose first, then usage guidance, sibling distinctions, auth, behavior, and return value. Every sentence earns its place, with no fluff or repetition of schema content.

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?

Given the annotations, complete schema parameter descriptions, and output schema, the description supplies the remaining context an agent needs: when to use it, what auth to provide, cost, side-effect guarantees, and expected return. Nothing important is missing for correct selection and invocation.

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 the baseline is 3 and the description need not compensate. The description references idempotency key protection and auth options but does not add parameter-level detail beyond the schema, which is acceptable given complete schema descriptions.

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?

The description uses a specific verb and resource: 'Check whether a paid action is protected against duplicate execution via an idempotency key.' It distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly naming vc_agent_state_guard and vc_retry_storm_guard and stating their different scopes.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description gives explicit when-to-use guidance ('Use before retrying a payment or other side-effecting call'), explicit when-not-to-use guidance ('Do not use for content fetch — use vc_web_search / vc_page_markdown'), and names alternative tools for related but distinct concerns.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools target a clearly distinct resource and action: notepad save/read/list/share/browse is cleanly separated from workspace create/read/write/list, and pairs like vc_web_search vs vc_page_markdown have explicit boundaries. The four guard tools (state, drift, idempotency, retry storm) share the same advisory-preflight pattern and could be confused at a glance, though their differing nouns and sibling cross-references reduce misselection.

Naming Consistency4/5

The vc_<domain>_<action> convention with the action verb last is consistent across most tools (v_c_notepad_save, v_c_workspace_create, v_c_square_post, v_c_drift_guard, v_c_attest_verify). Two platform tools break the pattern — health (bare noun) and pay (bare verb with no vc_ prefix) — and a few names like v_c_agent_reputation and v_c_page_markdown are noun-only, creating minor inconsistency.

Tool Count3/5

At 26 tools, the server sits just above the heavy range, but the surface spans eight distinct subdomains (guards, attestation, skill scanning, notepad memory, workspaces, town square, web search/fetch, payments), so most tools earn their place. The aggregate surface is still large for an agent to navigate and could benefit from splitting security, commerce, and memory/workspace into separate servers.

Completeness3/5

Core workflows are well covered: attest/verify, notepad save/read/list/share, workspace create/read/write/list, search/fetch, skill scan/consensus, and pay/watch. Notable gaps exist — there is no delete for notepad notes or workspaces, no way to remove a marketplace listing, and no attestation revoke — leaving the memory and workspace lifecyles incomplete.