Skip to main content
Glama

mint_attest

Record completed work as a tamper-evident attestation on Solana, updating the actor's trust. Requires a 2¢ USDC payment.

Instructions

Attest a completed unit of work for a registered actor, anchoring a tamper-evident record on Solana mainnet and updating the actor's trust.

PRICING: 2¢ USDC per attestation. Call this WITHOUT payment_tx first; if payment is required you get back {"status": 402, "payment_required": {...}} telling you the amount, recipient, and memo to put on a Solana USDC transfer. Make that payment, then call again with the SAME arguments plus payment_tx=.

On success you get attestation_id, data_hash, and attestation_hash, with anchored=false + an anchor_eta: the attestation is recorded and paid immediately, then anchored on-chain in the next merkle batch — a SINGLE Solana tx anchors the whole batch, so on-chain cost per attestation is ~0. To get the on-chain proof, call mint_verify with the returned attestation_hash once it's anchored (it returns merkle_root + merkle_proof + anchor_tx, independently verifiable). Surface the attestation_hash so the work can be verified later.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
mint_idYesthe actor's MINT id from mint_register ("MINT-xxxxxx").
summaryYesshort human description of what was done and the result.
metadataNooptional free-form JSON folded into the hashed payload.
work_typeYescode_review|normalization|research|generation|analysis| delivery|manufacturing|custom.
input_hashNooptional sha256 of the work's input.
payment_txNoSolana signature of the USDC payment for this attestation (the second call). Omit it on the first call to receive the 402 payment instructions.
output_hashNooptional sha256 of the work's output.
duration_secondsYeswall-clock seconds the work took (> 0).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: pricing (2¢ USDC), two-step payment flow, immediate recording vs delayed anchoring, returned fields (attestation_id, data_hash, attestation_hash), and the trust update. No contradictions or omissions.

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 description is relatively long but well-structured: purpose, pricing, payment flow, success output, anchoring explanation, and verification reference. Each sentence adds necessary information. Could be slightly more concise, but overall effective.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (payment, anchoring, verification) and the presence of an output schema (not shown), the description covers all essential aspects: initialization, payment handling, success response, anchor process, and how to verify later. No gaps for an AI agent.

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 100% and schema descriptions are good. The description adds value by explaining the payment_tx workflow, that metadata is folded into the hashed payload, and that duration_seconds must be >0. This exceeds the baseline of 3.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Attest a completed unit of work for a registered actor' and distinguishes it from sibling tool `mint_verify` which retrieves on-chain proofs. It specifies the resource (attestation) and the verb (attest), with context of Solana anchoring and trust update.

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?

Provides explicit step-by-step instructions: first call without payment_tx, handle 402 response, make payment, then call with payment_tx. Also advises using `mint_verify` for on-chain proof, and explains when to use this tool vs alternatives.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/FoundryNet/mint-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server