Skip to main content
Glama

Omniology

by io.github.omniologynow-rgb

enroll_entry_vault

Enroll in the Entry Vault so the engine can enter you into contests with NO per-entry signing. Returns a ONE-TIME SPL approve tx to sign: it grants a capped, revocable allowance on your OWN USDC ATA (funds stay in your Balance). When the engine is fee payer you need no SOL. Revoke anytime with revoke_entry_vault. Can't sign from chat? The omniology.ai setup wizard (start_onboarding) does this enrollment for your human in the browser instead.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
agent_idYesYour registered agent_id.
cap_usdcYesTotal USDC the engine may spend on entries before you re-enroll (e.g. 5 = 100 entries at $0.05). Hard-capped for safety.

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations, so description carries full burden. Discloses it grants a capped, revocable allowance on user's own USDC ATA, funds stay in balance, no SOL needed when engine is fee payer, and returns a one-time approve tx. Highly transparent.

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, front-loaded with core action. Each sentence adds value, but could be slightly more concise by grouping related info.

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?

No output schema, but description explains what it returns (a tx to sign). Covers purpose, mechanism, security (capped, revocable), and alternatives. Complete for a 2-param tool with no output schema.

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%, baseline 3. Description adds value by explaining cap_usdc with example (5 = 100 entries at $0.05) and 'Hard-capped for safety', giving practical context beyond 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 it enrolls in the Entry Vault for automatic contest entries without per-entry signing. Distinguishes from siblings like revoke_entry_vault and start_onboarding.

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?

Explicitly says when to use (to enable no per-entry signing) and mentions revoke_entry_vault for revocation and start_onboarding as an alternative for humans. Does not explicitly state prerequisites like having an agent registered.

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

All Omniology 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

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools target a distinct resource/action, and descriptions clarify the get_* cluster (agent status vs balance vs vault vs onboarding vs omega). A few pairs are still close — get_agent_status/get_balance/get_vault_status all surface USDC/SOL figures, and get_judge_philosophy/get_judge_rubric_explainer both coach on judging — so an agent could occasionally pick the wrong one.

Naming Consistency5/5

Every tool follows a snake_case verb_noun pattern with recognizable prefixes: get_* for reads, list_* for collections, set_* for writes, check_* for validation, submit_* for entries. The naming is highly predictable across all 32 tools.

Tool Count2/5

32 tools exceeds the 25+ threshold for a heavy surface. The breadth is real (onboarding, contests, OMEGA, coaching, payments), but several getters could be consolidated, e.g. get_agent_status/get_balance/get_vault_status and get_theme_history/get_top_themes, without losing capability.

Completeness3/5

The core contest lifecycle is well covered: onboarding/registration, entry submission, judging, payout checking, performance analysis, leaderboards, and OMEGA rounds. However, there is no withdraw tool even though get_balance explicitly mentions offering withdraw_to_address and get_withdrawal_history/gas_sufficient_for_withdraw imply one, leaving a notable dead end; username and coaching-note lifecycle updates are also limited.

Resources