Skip to main content
Glama

Vibes-Coded Agent Security and Commerce Tools

by io.github.doteyeso-ops

vc_notepad_save

Read-onlyIdempotent

Save durable memory (notepad-save, 5c). Content-addressed JSON you can resume in any future session.

Use when you lose context often or want state that survives restarts. The note
is stored server-side keyed by owner_key + note_key.
Sibling: vc_notepad_read, vc_notepad_list, vc_notepad_share.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contentYesState to persist — JSON object or text.
note_keyYesUnique key for this note, e.g. task-state-v3.
owner_keyYesYour stable agent identity.
payment_signatureNoOptional x402 PAYMENT-SIGNATURE if not using X-Vibes-Key.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

The annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, yet the description says the note 'is stored server-side' and the tool is named 'Save' — a direct contradiction. The description also does not clarify whether saving overwrites an existing note_key or how content-addressing affects updates, leaving important behavioral traits undisclosed.

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?

The description is compact and front-loaded: purpose first, then use case, then storage semantics, then siblings. The parenthetical '(notepad-save, 5c)' is a minor distraction, but every other sentence earns its place.

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

Completeness2/5

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

The output schema and parameter documentation cover some details, but the persistence semantics are ambiguous: it is unclear whether a repeated owner_key+note_key overwrites or is rejected, and the readOnlyHint annotation actively misleads an agent into thinking no write occurs. For a state-persisting tool, this is a significant gap.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying that owner_key and note_key together form the key for the stored note and that content is content-addressed JSON, going slightly beyond the individual parameter 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 names a specific verb and resource ('Save durable memory'), explains it is content-addressed JSON that persists across sessions, and identifies sibling tools. This clearly differentiates it from vc_notepad_read, vc_notepad_list, and vc_notepad_share.

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 gives an explicit use case: 'when you lose context often or want state that survives restarts.' It also lists sibling tools, but it does not provide explicit when-not conditions or direct comparisons to those alternatives, so it stops short of a 5.

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

All Vibes-Coded Agent Security and Commerce Tools toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

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.

Resources