trust-ledger-os
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| resources | {
"subscribe": false,
"listChanged": false
} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| get_manifestB | Return the Trust Ledger OS manifest. |
| list_phasesB | List the roadmap phases. |
| get_phaseA | Fetch one roadmap phase by id. |
| list_routesA | List the live app routes. |
| list_packagesA | List the npm, PyPI, and MCP package surfaces. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| manifest | Full Trust Ledger OS manifest |
| phases | Phase catalog |
| routes | Route catalog |
| packages | Package catalog |
TDQS
Scored across 5 tools
Each tool targets a distinct resource such as manifest, phases, routes, or packages, and get_phase is clearly the single-item counterpart to list_phases. There is only mild overlap potential in get_manifest possibly summarizing other surfaces, but descriptions keep the boundaries clear.
All tool names follow a consistent get_/list_ + noun pattern with snake_case throughout. This makes the tool set predictable and easy to navigate.
Five tools is a well-scoped size for a focused read-only informational server. Each tool covers a distinct surface without unnecessary duplication or bloat.
The core surfaces of the server—manifest, roadmap phases, routes, and packages—are covered with list and detail access where appropriate. Missing route- or package-level detail getters could be a minor gap, but list-level access may be sufficient for the apparent purpose.