agentcard

whoami

Read-onlyIdempotent

Show who you are operating as: the authenticated AgentCard account's email, user id, name, plan, KYC + account status, member-since date, and how this session is connected (personal login vs a third-party OAuth app connection, with the app name). Call this when the user asks "who am I" / "which account is this", or before money-moving actions when you need to confirm the account. Read-only. KYC shown here is the stored snapshot — use get_kyc_status when you need the live, provider-checked state.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	Cardholder name ("First Last"), or null before KYC info is submitted.
`plan`	No	Subscription plan id, e.g. 'free', 'basic', or 'pro'.
`email`	No	Email of the authenticated account, or null for a phone-first account (e.g. signed up by SMS on the iMessage relay).
`userId`	No	AgentCard user id of the authenticated account.
`message`	Yes	Human-readable identity summary.
`kycStatus`	No	Raw stored KYC state (e.g. approved, pending, requires_input), or null if never started.
`kycVerified`	No	Whether identity verification (KYC) has passed (stored snapshot).
`memberSince`	No	ISO timestamp the account was created.
`accountStatus`	No	Account standing: 'active' or 'suspended'.
`connectionType`	No	How this session authenticates: 'oauth' (third-party app connection), 'personal' (CLI/dashboard login), or 'organization' (a company's Agentcard integration acting for its end user).
`connectionClientId`	No	OAuth client id of the connected app, when connectionType is oauth.
`subscriptionStatus`	No	Stripe subscription status (e.g. 'active', 'past_due'), or null on the free plan.
`connectionClientName`	No	Display name of the connected OAuth app (e.g. "Claude"), when known.
`connectionOrganizationId`	No	Organization id, when connectionType is organization.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

First observedJul 28, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds beyond this by noting that KYC shown is a stored snapshot, not live state, and suggests get_kyc_status for live checks. No contradiction with annotations.

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 sentences, no wasted words. First sentence is dense but efficient. Could be slightly more concise but still well-structured.

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?

Fully covers the tool's purpose, return fields, and usage context. Output schema exists (not shown) but description lists return values. No gaps for a zero-parameter read-only tool.

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 has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so description adds no param info. With zero params, baseline is 4; no additional semantics are needed.

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 uses the specific verb 'show' and resource 'who you are operating as' with a detailed list of fields (email, user id, name, plan, etc.). It distinguishes from siblings by contrasting with get_kyc_status for live state.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly states when to call: when user asks 'who am I' / 'which account is this', or before money-moving actions. Provides a clear alternative for live KYC state via get_kyc_status.

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

All agentcard tools Inspect

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

A3.9/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, especially in areas like card management and shopping. However, the KYC flow has multiple overlapping tools (start_kyc, get_kyc_status, check_kyc_document, submit_kyc_document, submit_kyc_fields) that could confuse an agent despite detailed descriptions.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names consistently use snake_case with a verb_noun pattern (e.g., add_funds, create_card, list_cards). A few exceptions like surprise_me and whoami break the pattern but are still intuitive overall.

Tool Count3/5

50 tools is on the high side for a single server, but the broad domain (cards, shopping, KYC, support, settings) partially justifies it. Some tools could be merged (e.g., KYC flow tools) without losing clarity.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers core workflows: CRUD for cards, transactions, KYC, support, shopping, and account management. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no update_card general, no cancel order in shopping), but overall the set is comprehensive for the stated purpose.

Resources

Need Help?