Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

XGuard Live

by io.github.moelayyan90
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

xguard.authority.verify_receipt

Read-onlyIdempotent

Verify a financial authority receipt against the existing ProofRail key, without charging.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "receipt": "<receipt>"
    },
    "name": "xguard.authority.verify_receipt"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
receiptYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral facts beyond them: no charge is incurred and a pre-existing ProofRail key is a prerequisite. It does not say what happens when the receipt is invalid (error raised vs negative result), which is the main behavioral unknown for a verify tool.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the negation ('without charging') is placed where it matters most. It is arguably compressed to the point of terseness, but nothing in it is wasted.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool is simple (one required parameter, no nesting) and annotations cover its safety profile, so little is strictly required. However, with no output schema, the description ought to say what a successful or failed verification looks like; that gap leaves the agent unable to interpret the return value.

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?

Only one parameter and schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the load; it does clarify that the string is a financial authority receipt checked against a ProofRail key rather than an arbitrary blob. It still omits the receipt's encoding/format (opaque token, JWT, base64), so an agent cannot pre-validate the 8192-char input.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb (verify) and resource (a financial authority receipt), plus two qualifiers that sharpen it: verification is against the 'existing ProofRail key' and happens 'without charging'. That last clause distinguishes it from any paid verification path in the family, though it does not name a sibling explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied rather than stated: 'without charging' signals this is the free/no-side-effect verification route, and 'existing ... key' hints a key must already be provisioned. There is no explicit statement of when to pick this over xguard.verify or what to do when no key exists.

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

All XGuard Live toolsInspect
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.

Resources