stillos-kya
Server Details
KYA: fail-closed CLEAR/REVIEW/BLOCK counterparty screen (OFAC + on-chain), signed receipt.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
- Repository
- stillmarcus24/stillos-kya
- GitHub Stars
- 0
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 4.2/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.
Only one tool exists, so there is no ambiguity with other tools. The description is thorough and leaves no room for confusion.
With a single tool, naming is inherently consistent. The name 'kya_check' follows a clear verb_noun pattern.
A single tool is borderline for the implied scope; the description suggests potential additional capabilities (e.g., paid tier, proofs) that could warrant more tools.
The tool covers the core screening functionality, but there are no tools for managing payments, retrieving history, or handling extended workflows, which may be gaps.
Available Tools
1 toolkya_checkAInspect
Know Your Agent (KYA): screen a counterparty agent BEFORE paying it. Returns a fail-closed verdict -- CLEAR, REVIEW, or BLOCK -- from an OFAC SDN sanctions screen plus live on-chain wallet signals, with an Ed25519-signed proof-of-diligence receipt on the paid tier. Call this before any agent-to-agent payment.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | No | Counterparty legal/display name to sanctions-screen (optional) | |
| wallet | No | Counterparty EVM wallet address for on-chain risk signals (optional) |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explains the input (optional name and wallet), output (verdict categories and receipt), and that it is fail-closed. It mentions a signed proof on the paid tier. While it doesn't explicitly state it is read-only, the context implies no destructive side effects.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is concise and front-loaded: first sentence defines purpose, second explains output, third gives usage. No unnecessary words, though could be slightly more structured.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given no output schema, the description effectively explains return values (verdict categories). It covers input parameters, usage context, and output format, making it fully complete for a screening tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% and the description adds context by linking 'name' to sanctions screening and 'wallet' to on-chain risk signals. This adds meaning beyond the schema's property descriptions, but the baseline is 3 due to high coverage.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool screens a counterparty agent before payment, returns a fail-closed verdict (CLEAR, REVIEW, BLOCK) from OFAC sanctions and on-chain signals, and provides a proof-of-diligence receipt. It distinguishes itself as a pre-payment compliance check.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description explicitly says 'Call this before any agent-to-agent payment', giving clear usage context. It does not mention alternatives or when not to use, but the guidance is direct and actionable.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!