Agent Arena Registry

Server Details

On-chain ERC-8004 agent registry. Search, register, and check reputation across 16 chains.

If you are the author of this connector, you can claim ownership with GitHub, an HTTP challenge, or a DNS record. Claimed connector authors can inspect health checks, view analytics, and manage their listing.

Verification

Glama connects to this endpoint on a schedule and records what it finds.

2025-06-18MCP protocol negotiated

3Tools discovered

Last verified Sep 17, 2026 · 6:29 AM

Status: Healthy
Last Tested: 2026-09-17 06:29
Transport: Streamable HTTP
URL

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Scored 2026-08-01 02:10 across 3 tools

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct operation: retrieving a specific agent profile, registering a new agent, and searching the registry. There is no overlap in purpose, making selection unambiguous.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow the verb_noun pattern: get_agent_profile, register_agent, search_agents. The naming is uniformly descriptive and predictable.

Tool Count5/5

Three tools is well-scoped for a registry that offers core create, read, and search functionality. Each tool serves a clear, non-redundant purpose.

Completeness4/5

The set covers the primary lifecycle (register, get, search), but lacks update/delete operations for agent profiles. These are minor gaps that do not block core discovery and registration use cases.

Available Tools

3 tools

get_agent_profileAInspect

Retrieve the full profile of a specific agent by their on-chain ID. Returns name, description, endpoints, reputation, reviews, and cross-chain presence. Free endpoint.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`agentId`	Yes	On-chain agent ID (token ID from the ERC-8004 registry)
`chainId`	Yes	Chain ID where the agent is registered (e.g. 8453 for Base)

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It adds 'Free endpoint' and lists return fields, but it does not disclose authentication requirements, rate limits, or error behavior. The read-only nature is implied by 'Retrieve,' but more detail would improve transparency.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence followed by a brief return list and a cost note. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy or 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 simple read tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, return contents, and cost. It could mention the chainId explicitly in the description text, but the schema already handles that. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool.

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 description coverage is 100%, with both agentId and chainId fully described. The description adds little beyond the schema, only referencing the on-chain ID. With full schema coverage, the baseline of 3 applies.

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 clearly states 'Retrieve the full profile of a specific agent by their on-chain ID,' making the verb and resource explicit. It also lists returned content (name, description, endpoints, reputation, reviews, cross-chain presence) and distinguishes itself from siblings like register_agent (create) and search_agents (query) by focusing on a single agent ID.

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?

The description implies usage when the agent ID is known, but it does not explicitly contrast with search_agents or state when not to use it. It provides clear context for invocation but lacks explicit alternative guidance.

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

register_agentAInspect

Register a new AI agent on the Base blockchain ERC-8004 registry. Mints an on-chain identity NFT and indexes the agent for discovery. Requires $0.05 USDC payment via x402 on Base mainnet.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`acta`	No	Optional ACTA Preview metadata when registering through POST /api/register?acta=true
`name`	Yes	Agent display name
`oasf`	No	Set true (POST /api/register?oasf=true) to publish a hosted OASF Agent Directory record
`services`	No	Service endpoints
`agentWallet`	No	Wallet address to receive payments
`description`	Yes	Full agent description
`x402Support`	No	Whether agent accepts x402 payments
`capabilities`	No	Lowercase capability tags
`preferredChain`	No	Chain to register on (default: base)

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It discloses critical behaviors: on-chain registration, NFT minting, indexing for discovery, and a $0.05 USDC payment requirement via x402. This goes beyond a simple 'registers an agent' and provides useful operational context, though it omits failure modes or reversibility.

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?

The description consists of two succinct sentences that front-load the core purpose and side effects. Every sentence adds informational value with no redundancy or filler.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (9 parameters, nested objects, no output schema), the description conveys essential prerequisites (payment, mainnet) and outcomes (NFT mint, indexing). It does not describe the expected response format or error scenarios, but for a registration tool, the description is largely sufficient for an agent to understand and invoke it correctly.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for all 9 parameters, so structured data already explains each parameter. The description adds little parameter-level detail beyond reinforcing context like the blockchain and payment requirement. It does not clarify relationships or special cases (e.g., the meaning of acta/oasf flags), keeping it at the 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?

The description clearly states the action ('Register'), the specific resource ('a new AI agent on the Base blockchain ERC-8004 registry'), and distinct outcomes (mints NFT, indexes for discovery). It differentiates from sibling tools like get_agent_profile and search_agents, which are read-only operations.

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?

The description communicates the primary use case (registering a new agent) and implies the alternative is to retrieve or search existing agents via siblings. However, it does not explicitly state 'when not to use' or name alternatives, making the guidance somewhat implicit.

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

search_agentsAInspect

Search the Agent Arena registry for AI agents by capability, name, or description. Returns a list of matching agents with their endpoints, pricing, and reputation scores. Requires $0.005 USDC payment via x402 on Base mainnet.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`acta`	No	Only return agents with ACTA-ready private credential metadata
`oasf`	No	Only return agents with a hosted OASF Agent Directory record
`chain`	No	Filter by chain name, e.g. 'base', 'ethereum', 'polygon'
`limit`	No	Max results to return (default 10, max 50)
`query`	Yes	Search query — capability keywords, agent name, or description terms
`minScore`	No	Minimum reputation score filter (0-100)

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the burden of transparency. It discloses the $0.005 USDC payment requirement via x402 on Base mainnet, which is a significant behavioral trait, and indicates it returns a list with endpoints, pricing, and reputation scores. However, it does not explicitly state whether the operation is read-only or what happens on payment failure.

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?

The description is two concise sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, and includes key behavioral context without unnecessary verbosity.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, return data, and payment requirement. Given the schema fully documents parameters and there is no output schema, the description is largely complete for an agent to decide when and how to use the tool. It lacks explicit comparison to siblings but that is handled in usage guidelines.

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 descriptions cover 100% of parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal additional semantics beyond what the schema provides, such as indicating the query searches by capability, name, or description, but it does not elaborate on individual parameters.

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 clearly states the tool searches the Agent Arena registry for AI agents by capability, name, or description, distinguishing it from sibling tools get_agent_profile and register_agent.

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?

The description implies usage for discovering agents but does not explicitly contrast with get_agent_profile or register_agent, or state when not to use it. The context is clear but exclusions and alternatives are not stated.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

2 tool updatesJun 15, 2026

Changedregister_agent1 field changed

addedInput schema / properties / oasf

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Set true (POST /api/register?oasf=true) to publish a hosted OASF Agent Directory record",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

Changedsearch_agents1 field changed

addedInput schema / properties / oasf

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Only return agents with a hosted OASF Agent Directory record",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

2 tool updatesMay 25, 2026

Changedregister_agent1 field changed

addedInput schema / properties / acta

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional ACTA Preview metadata when registering through POST /api/register?acta=true",
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changedsearch_agents1 field changed

addedInput schema / properties / acta

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Only return agents with ACTA-ready private credential metadata",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

3 tool updatesFeb 23, 2026
- First observedget_agent_profile
- First observedregister_agent
- First observedsearch_agents

Related MCP Connectors

Agent Reputation Registry A
org.memoryapi
Agent reputation registry: check, register, and endorse AI agents
Agent Orchestration Autonomous Agents Security
2
Agentry — The Trust Layer for the Agent Economy B
io.github.cthulhutoo
Agent registry with Nostr identity, reputation, escrow, observability, and Lightning payments.
Agent Orchestration Autonomous Agents Blockchain
362
Joy Trust Network B
io.github.tlkc888-Jenkins
Trust infrastructure for AI agents. Portable reputation (JTS 0-5), agent discovery, vouching.
Autonomous Agents Security
312
agent-erc8004-bridge A
io.github.jdhart81
The MCP-native bridge to ERC-8004 (on-chain agent identity/reputation/validation): resolve registrat
Blockchain Web3 & Decentralized Tech Autonomous Agents
92

Related MCP Servers

BasedAgents
Autonomous Agents Security
maxfain
A
license
A
quality
C
maintenance
AI agent identity and reputation registry. Ed25519 cryptographic identity, proof-of-work registration, peer verification, reputation scoring, task marketplace, and agent-to-agent messaging.
Updated 13 hours ago (2026-09-16 17:42 UTC)
16
185 npm
Apache 2.0
AgentScore
Blockchain Web3 & Decentralized Tech Finance
agentscore
A
license
A
quality
C
maintenance
Provides trust and reputation tools for AI agent wallets within the x402 payment ecosystem and ERC-8004 agent registry. It enables users to perform wallet reputation lookups, real-time risk assessments, and browse registered agents.
Updated 5 months ago (2026-04-29 02:43 UTC)
4
342 npm
-
AgentVeil Protocol
AI & Machine Learning Autonomous Agents Security
agentveil-protocol
A
license
A
quality
A
maintenance
Trust, identity, and reputation infrastructure for AI agents. Register agents with W3C DID (Ed25519), check EigenTrust reputation scores, submit peer attestations, search agents by capability, and verify IPFS-anchored audit trails. 11 tools.
Updated a day ago (2026-09-16 08:32 UTC)
20
126 PyPI
15
MIT
ERC-8004 MCP Server
wpank
F
license
A
quality
D
maintenance
Enables querying ERC-8004 AI agent identities from on-chain and IPFS metadata. Supports search, listing, details, feedback, stats, and full metadata retrieval.
Updated 7 months ago (2026-02-19 13:29 UTC)
11
2
-

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

Need Help?