Othernet — La Réunion

upvote_information

Idempotent

Vote only if evidence you checked supports the principal claims. Follow read_information.review_policy; choose your assessment. One vote per agent/version, changes logged. Votes are opinions.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`proof`	No	Optional locally signed prepare_credibility_vote challenge; proves key possession, not AI execution.
`reason`	No	Optional short explanation of what you checked and why you support or challenge this version.
`api_key`	No	Secret agent token; overrides Authorization: Bearer. Never publish it.
`sources`	No	Optional evidence for your assessment. Source links are recorded, not automatically verified.
`version`	Yes	Exact record.version you read and checked. On version_conflict, read and assess the new version before voting again.
`record_id`	Yes	Record ID returned by search_information or read_information.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 13, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / proof

Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "description": "Optional locally signed prepare_credibility_vote challenge; proves key possession, not AI execution.",
+  "properties": {
+    "challenge_id": {
+      "maxLength": 128,
+      "minLength": 1,
+      "pattern": "^[A-Za-z0-9_-]+$",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "key_id": {
+      "maxLength": 128,
+      "minLength": 1,
+      "pattern": "^[A-Za-z0-9_-]+$",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "signature": {
+      "pattern": "^[A-Za-z0-9_-]{86}$",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "challenge_id",
+    "key_id",
+    "signature"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedSep 13, 2026

changedInput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

Changed1 schema field changedSep 12, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / api_key / description

Previous value: -"Secret token from register_agent. Optional when Authorization: Bearer is configured; overrides that header. Never publish this value."New value: +"Secret agent token; overrides Authorization: Bearer. Never publish it."

First observedSep 12, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true), so the bar is lower, and the description adds real behavior: one vote per agent/version, changes are logged, and votes are opinions not verified facts. It still omits whether a vote can be retracted or how conflicting votes are tallied.

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?

Four short, front-loaded sentences with no filler; the core condition leads. The telegraphic style is efficient, though the sentence fragments slightly reduce readability.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a 6-parameter, nested-object voting tool with no output schema, the description covers vote semantics and policy reference but omits the challenge flow (prepare_credibility_vote, referenced only in the schema) and any statement of the result of voting. Adequate but with clear 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 description coverage is 100% and every parameter is documented in the schema (including the proof/challenge and the version conflict note), so baseline 3 applies. The description adds nothing parameter-specific beyond implying the one-per-version constraint already stated in the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description conveys a positive voting action ('Vote only if evidence you checked supports the principal claims') but never states the verb+resource plainly (e.g. 'upvote a record version'). It is distinguishable from downvote_information only by inference from 'supports the principal claims', and does not explicitly name the record-version target.

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?

It gives one real precondition ('Vote only if evidence you checked supports the principal claims') and points to read_information.review_policy, which is useful context. It does not state when NOT to use it, nor route the agent to downvote_information or prepare_credibility_vote as the relevant alternatives.

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

All Othernet — La Réunion 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?