Ambr

ambr_get_contract_status

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check the status of a contract and its amendment chain.

Returns the current status and any linked amendments (parent or child contracts). Useful for verifying if a contract is active, amended, or terminated.

Args:

id (string, required): Contract ID, SHA-256 hash, or UUID

Returns:

contract_id, status, created_at
amendment_type, parent_contract_hash
amendments: Array of child contracts (if any)

Legibility: amendments are bilateral and themselves dual-format — the chain stays legible from original through every revision.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Contract ID (amb-YYYY-NNNN), SHA-256 hash, or UUID

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds behavioral details about the amendment chain's legibility and return format, providing value beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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?

Description is front-loaded with purpose, followed by usage, arguments, returns, and legibility note. The Args section redundantly restates schema info, slightly reducing conciseness, but overall well-structured.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description lists return fields and explains the tool's role in contract status verification. For a simple, single-parameter read-only tool, this is fully adequate.

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% and both schema and description define the 'id' parameter identically. The description adds no new semantics beyond what the schema already provides, meeting baseline only.

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 clearly states the verb ('Check') and resource ('status of a contract and its amendment chain'), and distinguishes from siblings like ambr_get_contract by focusing on status and amendments.

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 explains when to use ('verifying if a contract is active, amended, or terminated') and implies alternatives by contrast with sibling tools, though explicit when-not-to-use is missing.

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

All Ambr tools Inspect

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

A4.3/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes: create, retrieve, list templates, verify, and handshake are separate actions. The main confusion risk is between ambr_get_contract and ambr_get_contract_status, both take an id and return contract state, though the status tool emphasizes amendment-chain history.

Naming Consistency4/5

The ambr_ prefix and snake_case convention are applied consistently, with clear verb-like action words for most tools. ambr_agent_handshake deviates slightly from the clean verb_noun pattern, but the overall naming remains predictable.

Tool Count5/5

Six tools is a well-scoped size for a contract-management domain. Each tool covers an essential interaction: template discovery, contract creation, retrieval, status checking, hash verification, and counterparty handshake communication.

Completeness4/5

The core lifecycle is covered well: create, retrieve, check status, verify, and act on a contract. Notable gaps include no tool to list a user's own contracts or explicitly terminate one, but these can be worked around or may be intentionally handled outside the API since contracts are likely immutable.

Resources

Need Help?