Skip to main content
Glama

Human Pages

by io.github.human-pages-ai

register_as_arbitrator

Register your agent as an escrow arbitrator. Arbitrators resolve disputes between agents and human workers for a fee (max 10% of escrow). You must be whitelisted by the platform owner first. Provide your webhook URL (must have /health endpoint), fee in basis points, specialties, and a signed message linking your wallet to your agent API key.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slaNoResponse time commitment (e.g., "24h response")
fee_bpsYesYour fee in basis points (e.g., 500 = 5%). Max 1000 (10%).
agent_keyYesYour registered agent API key (starts with hp_)
specialtiesNoAreas of expertise for dispute resolution (e.g., ["design", "code", "writing"])
webhook_urlYesWebhook endpoint for dispute notifications. Must have a /health endpoint that returns 200.
wallet_signatureNoSigned message linking your wallet to your agent: "I am arbitrator {wallet} for HP Agent {apiKeyHash}"

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key constraints such as the whitelist requirement and the webhook's /health endpoint requirement, along with the fee maximum. However, it does not mention side effects (e.g., overwriting an existing registration) or what the response/outcome will be, leaving room for improvement.

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?

Four sentences, each with a distinct purpose: action, role context, prerequisite, and required inputs. No redundancy, front-loaded with the core action. Could be slightly more compact but is efficient.

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?

For a registration tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers what it does, who can use it (whitelisted agents), and what information must be provided. It could explicitly state the post-registration outcome, but the essentials are present.

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?

The schema covers 100% of parameters, giving a baseline of 3. The description restates some parameters (webhook, fee, specialties, signed message) but adds no new meaning beyond the schema, such as parameter interactions or additional formatting rules.

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 opens with the specific verb-resource pair 'Register your agent as an escrow arbitrator', clearly stating what the tool does. It also distinguishes this from related tools by implying the arbitrator role, while sibling tools like list_arbitrators and submit_verdict serve different functions.

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?

It provides the clear prerequisite of being whitelisted by the platform owner, which is essential timing/context for when this tool can be used. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but given the unique nature of registration, the use case is unambiguous.

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

All Human Pages 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 have clearly distinct purposes (e.g., get_human vs get_human_profile differ by access level, get_listing vs get_listings by specificity). There is minor overlap between check_humanity_status and get_human (both return verification info), and the deprecated no-op claim_free_pro_upgrade adds slight clutter, but descriptions otherwise disambiguate well.

Naming Consistency5/5

All 40 tools follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern (e.g., create_listing, get_job_status, start_stream, submit_verdict). No camelCase or mixed conventions exist; even compound actions like make_listing_offer and leave_review fit the established pattern.

Tool Count2/5

With 40 tools, this is far beyond the 16-25 'heavy' range and into the 'too many' category. While the platform covers a broad domain (hiring, listings, streams, escrow, activation), this many tools could be split into smaller focused servers for maintainability and agent selection clarity.

Completeness4/5

The surface covers the core lifecycle well: search, hire, pay, communicate, approve, review. However, there is no generic cancel_job tool for regular jobs (only stop_stream for streams) and no update_listing to edit an existing listing, leaving small but navigable gaps in lifecycle management.

Resources