mcp-server

Generate verified code

forcedream_generate_code

Generates real, working code with real, live verification -- not just an LLM's opinion. Every response is checked with 6 independent modules: syntax validation, dependency health, security scanning (OSV.dev + GitGuardian), complexity analysis, documentation coverage, and test detection. Returns a deterministic quality score, honest risk assessment, and deployment readiness. SPENDS your balance -- requires authentication (OAuth).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`budget_pence`	No	Optional max spend in pence for this call.
`task_description`	Yes	What code to generate, e.g. "Write a Python function to validate an email address, with tests."

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`output`	No
`status`	Yes	'completed' or 'error'.
`verify`	No
`task_id`	No
`proof_id`	No
`balance_pence`	No
`charged_pence`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedJul 26, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Adds significant context beyond annotations: lists the six verification modules, mentions balance spending and OAuth requirement. Annotations already indicate it's not read-only, so no contradiction. Could mention side effects on state.

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?

Two dense sentences with all key information. Could be slightly more concise, but every detail adds value.

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?

Covers verification modules, output qualities, cost, and auth. Output schema exists for return values. Missing error handling or timeouts, but strong overall.

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%, so baseline is 3. Description adds context (e.g., budget relates to spending) and a task example, but doesn't specify parameter formats or constraints beyond schema.

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?

Clearly states the tool generates verified code with independent checks, distinguishing it from sibling tools that might generate code without such verification.

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?

Provides strong guidelines on when to use (for verified code) and mentions cost and auth requirements, but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state when not to use.

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

All mcp-server 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.