Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Agentic AQUA

Agentic AQUA

Official
by AquaWallet
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

jan3_login_start

Starts a paid JAN3 login when free email-OTP is unavailable: funds AQUA's vault with L-BTC and requests an email OTP for completion.

Instructions

Fallback JAN3 login (paid captchaless) — use only when the free jan3_login email-OTP flow isn't available for the account. Step 1: crafts a signed L-BTC tx funding AQUA's vault for the CAPTCHALESS_LOGIN price, POSTs it to /api/v2/auth/login/, and the server emails an OTP. Then call jan3_login_complete.

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": {
      "email": "<email>"
    },
    "name": "jan3_login_start"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
emailYesJAN3 account email — will receive the OTP.
languageNo2-letter language code for the OTP email.en
passwordNoDecrypts the wallet mnemonic if encrypted at rest.
wallet_nameNoLiquid wallet used to fund the login payment.default
password_fileNoPath to a local file containing the wallet password; keeps the password out of the conversation. Do not combine with password.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
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 most of it well: it discloses that the call spends real L-BTC into AQUA's vault at the CAPTCHALESS_LOGIN price, hits /api/v2/auth/login/, and triggers a server-side OTP email — a payment-spending side effect an agent must know about. It stops short of stating whether the payment is lost if the OTP step is never completed (no refund/failure semantics), which matters for an irreversible-value operation.

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?

Front-loaded with the fallback/paid qualifier, then a compact 'Step 1' clause covering mechanism and next step. The /api/v2/auth/login/ endpoint reference is slightly extraneous for an agent, but it is one clause, not padding.

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 5-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description supplies the missing cross-tool context: why this variant exists, that money is spent, and where to go next. The only real omission is outcome behavior on failure (what happens to the funded payment if the OTP is never submitted).

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%, so the baseline is 3; the schema already explains email, language, wallet_name, and the password vs. password_file mutual exclusion. The description implies a funded Liquid wallet is required for the payment but adds no new detail on password handling or wallet selection beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Fallback JAN3 login', paid captchaless) and immediately positions it against the free 'jan3_login' sibling, so an agent can pick between them without opening either schema. It also names the downstream step, 'jan3_login_complete'.

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?

Explicit selection rule: 'use only when the free jan3_login email-OTP flow isn't available for the account.' It also sequences the flow ('Then call jan3_login_complete'), leaving nothing about ordering to inference.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools