OMENZ agent tools

passport_check

Permission Passport check: ALLOW or DENY an agent's next action (tool, URL/host, amount, spent so far) against its passport, with reasons, spend left and time left. Rejects forged or expired passports. By OMENZ. (MCP calls run in AYNE, the free playzone; production: POST https://www.omenz.org/api/tollbooth/v1/passport/check, $0.001 via x402.)

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": {
      "token": "<token>"
    },
    "name": "passport_check"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`token`	Yes
`action`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 14, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the binary ALLOW/DENY outcome, that reasons/spend-left/time-left are returned, that forged or expired passports are rejected, and the cost/endpoint model ($0.001 via x402). It omits failure-mode detail such as what error shape a forged passport yields, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

The core ALLOW/DENY behavior and its inputs are front-loaded in the first sentence, with rejection and pricing details following. The 'By OMENZ' attribution and endpoint/pricing parenthetical add some promotional noise but also genuinely useful deployment context.

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 2-parameter decision tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the inputs, the ALLOW/DENY return semantics, rejection behavior, and cost. Only the exact token format and error shapes are left unstated, a minor gap.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does: it enumerates the fields the 'action' object should carry (tool, URL/host, amount, spent so far), which meaningfully documents the nested object beyond the bare schema. The 'token' parameter is only implied as the passport, so it is not fully covered.

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 and resource: 'Permission Passport check: ALLOW or DENY an agent's next action ... against its passport.' The verb/resource pairing is unambiguous, and the 'check' wording contrasts implicitly with the sibling passport_issue, though it never names that sibling as the issuance alternative.

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 phrase 'an agent's next action' implies this is called as a pre-action gate, but the description never explicitly says when to call it versus alternatives or when NOT to (e.g., use passport_issue first if no passport exists). Usage is inferable but not spelled out.

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

All OMENZ agent tools tools Inspect

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?