Skip to main content
Glama

Human Pages

by io.github.human-pages-ai

submit_verdict

Submit a signed EIP-712 verdict to resolve an escrow dispute. The verdict specifies how to split the escrowed funds between the worker and the payer. Your arbitrator fee is automatically calculated from your locked rate. Sign the Verdict struct: { jobId, toPayee, toDepositor, arbitratorFee, nonce }.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nonceYesUnique nonce for replay protection
job_idYesThe disputed job ID
to_payeeYesAmount to send to worker (raw USDC, 6 decimals, e.g. "70000000" for $70)
agent_keyYesYour agent API key
signatureYesEIP-712 signature of the Verdict struct (hex string starting with 0x)
to_depositorYesAmount to refund to payer (raw USDC, 6 decimals)
arbitrator_feeYesYour fee amount (raw USDC, 6 decimals). Must match your locked rate.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Discloses that the arbitrator fee is automatically calculated from the locked rate and that a signed Verdict struct is required. However, it does not describe side effects (e.g., funds released, dispute closed) or prerequisites, and with no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. Partial transparency only.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the main action, followed by context and signing details. Every sentence contributes meaning with no fluff.

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 7-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose, role, fee calculation, and signing structure. It lacks explicit prerequisites (e.g., being an active arbitrator) and outcome details, but is largely complete for the core operation.

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 coverage is 100%, providing baseline 3. The description adds value by showing the canonical EIP-712 Verdict struct (jobId, toPayee, toDepositor, arbitratorFee, nonce) and explains the fee behavior relative to locked rate, which clarifies the relationship between parameters beyond the 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 'Submit a signed EIP-712 verdict to resolve an escrow dispute' with a specific verb and resource. The description distinguishes this from sibling tools like approve_completion or request_revision by focusing on the final verdict submission.

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?

Description implies usage context: resolving an escrow dispute as an arbitrator, mentioning 'Your arbitrator fee'. It does not explicitly list alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the context is clear from sibling tools like request_revision and get_dispute_details.

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