Skip to main content
Glama

optionality-mcp

by io.github.lonniev

optionality_session_status

Check operator readiness. Returns the operator lifecycle state and clear guidance on what to do next. Free.

Lifecycle states:

  • ready: Operator is warm and fully operational — vault AND pricing model verified. Proceed with tool calls.

  • warming_up: Operator is initializing (cold start). Try a tool call — it will warm up on demand.

  • misconfigured: Persistence rejected a query with a permanent SQL error (permission denied, missing relation). Paid tools will fail until the operator repairs the database — retrying does not help.

  • quota_exceeded: The persistence provider (Neon) answered HTTP 402 — the operator's database has exhausted its compute/storage quota, so the books are locked for billing. Paid tools fail; retrying does NOT help. The operator's Authority must restore capacity (upgrade the plan or wait for the quota reset). Free tools remain available.

  • not_registered: Operator has no Authority relationship yet. Call register_operator first.

  • no_identity: Operator nsec is not configured. Deployment issue.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
patron_npubNoOptional. If supplied, the response includes an ``upstream_oauth`` block with the patron's stored OAuth token expiry (runtime-derived from vault state) so a client can refresh proactively rather than reactively after a stale-token failure.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses all possible states, including failure modes (misconfigured, quota_exceeded) and their implications, plus notes that it's free and that retrying doesn't help for certain states.

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?

Well-structured with front-loaded purpose and clear list of states. Slightly lengthy but every sentence adds value; no redundancy.

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?

Covers all necessary context for a diagnostic tool: each state, implications, and next steps. Output schema exists, so return format explanation not needed.

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% with one optional parameter documented. Description does not add extra meaning for parameters beyond what schema provides, meeting baseline.

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?

Description clearly states 'Check operator readiness' and elaborates with specific lifecycle states, distinguishing it from sibling tools like optionality_service_status by focusing on operator lifecycle and actionable guidance.

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 clear guidance on when to use and what each state implies (e.g., 'Proceed with tool calls' for ready, 'Try a tool call' for warming_up). Does not explicitly exclude alternatives but gives actionable next steps.

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

All optionality-mcp 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

B3.1/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

There is substantial overlap and confusion between multiple sets of tools. For example, `optionality_get_operator_onboarding_status` and `optionality_get_patron_onboarding_status` serve different identities but have a similar purpose that could be confusing. More critically, there are generic-named tools like `optionality_receive_credentials` and `optionality_receive_npub_proof` that both drain a relay mailbox in a very similar way, distinguished primarily by the type of token they return. The presence of both `optionality_session_status` and `optionality_service_status` is a major point of ambiguity, as both seem to check the health and configuration of the operator.

Naming Consistency4/5

The naming convention is highly consistent, using a snake_case, verb_noun pattern (e.g., `list_journal`, `delete_journal`). The prefix `optionality_` is applied to all tools. The verb 'get' and 'list' are used predictably. Minor point deduction for a few outliers like `optionality_deal_scenario` and `optionality_judge_trade` which are domain-specific verbs that don't perfectly fit the CRUD pattern but are still clear in context.

Tool Count1/5

With 71 tools, this server is severely over-staffed. This indicates poor separation of concerns, likely bundling multiple distinct domains or services into a single surface. A tool count this high dramatically increases cognitive load and API surface area, making it difficult for an agent to find the correct tool.

Completeness3/5

The tool surface covers an enormous amount of functionality, including imaginative ownership-proof flows via Nostr DMs. However, the `check_balance`/`purchase_credits` flow appears incomplete without a `refund_credits` tool for operator support scenarios. While the server has a `restore_credits` tool, it requires authentication. Overall, the surface is individually creative but organizationally incoherent.

Resources