Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

VEYA

by io.github.veyanet
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

veya_anchor_proof

Anchor a content proof on Veya.sol from YOUR wallet (apiKey + payerPrivateKey). Does not use the hosted signer.

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": {
      "label": "<label>",
      "content": "<content>"
    },
    "name": "veya_anchor_proof"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
labelYes
apiKeyNoProduct API key (veya_dev_… / veya_live_…). Mint on the product site. Guest JWT is not a write credential.
contentYes
sessionTokenNoOptional guest JWT for Use listing only. Prefer apiKey.
environmentIdNo
payerPrivateKeyNoUser wallet private key that pays gas. Prefer VEYA_PAYER_PRIVATE_KEY on a self-hosted MCP.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description does disclose the important behavioral fact: this is a self-custody write that requires apiKey plus a gas-paying payer private key, and it deliberately bypasses the hosted signer. It does not state that this is an on-chain transaction, whether it is irreversible or costs gas beyond the key hint, or what happens on failure.

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?

Two tight sentences with the credential requirement front-loaded and no filler. Slightly clipped to the point that the scope statement is doing work the reader has to infer.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Six parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, yet the description never explains what label/content mean, what environmentId scopes, or what an agent gets back after anchoring. For a write tool with this much structured-data silence, the description leaves material gaps.

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 50%: apiKey, payerPrivateKey and sessionToken are already documented in the schema, and the description mostly echoes the key pairing rather than adding syntax. The three undocumented parameters (label, content, environmentId) get no explanation of format or semantics, so the description does not compensate for the coverage gap.

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 (anchor), a specific resource (a content proof on Veya.sol), and a specific signing model (from your own wallet, not the hosted signer). This differentiates it from the hosted-signer path implied by siblings like veya_prove, though it never names that sibling outright.

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?

"From YOUR wallet... Does not use the hosted signer" implies the selecting condition (you hold the payer key and want self-custodied signing), but the alternative tool is never named and there are no explicit when-not cases or prerequisites beyond the credential mention.

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

All VEYA 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