Skip to main content
Glama
I4cTime

q-ring

by I4cTime
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

validate_secret

Read-onlyIdempotent

Tests whether a stored secret is still accepted by its upstream provider using one minimal authenticated request, confirming credential liveness before use or after rotation.

Instructions

[validation] Test whether a stored secret is still accepted by its upstream service (OpenAI, Stripe, GitHub, AWS, generic HTTP, etc.) by making a minimal authenticated request. Use to confirm liveness before relying on a credential or as the verification step after rotate_secret; prefer ci_validate_secrets for a batch run across every key in scope. Side effects: makes one outbound network request per call (may incur tiny provider-side rate-limit cost). Records 'read' for the underlying secret value in the audit log; the value itself is never logged. Returns JSON { valid, provider, status?, message?, rateLimit?, ... } (provider-specific shape).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keyYesThe exact key whose value should be tested upstream. Example: 'OPENAI_API_KEY'.
orgIdNoOrganization identifier for org-scoped secrets. Required only when scope='org'. Example: 'acme-corp'.
scopeNoWhere the secret lives. 'global' = user keyring (default if omitted on reads), 'project' = scoped to projectPath, 'team' = team-shared (needs teamId), 'org' = org-shared (needs orgId).
teamIdNoTeam identifier for team-scoped secrets. Required only when scope='team'. Example: 'acme-platform'.
providerNoForce a specific provider id. Built-ins include 'openai', 'stripe', 'github', 'aws', 'http'. Omit to auto-detect from the value's prefix or the secret's stored provider hint.
projectPathNoAbsolute path to the project root for project-scoped secrets and policy resolution. Defaults to the MCP server's current working directory when omitted.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed6 schema fields changedv0.11.7
    • changedInput schema / properties / key / description
      Previous value: -"The secret key name"New value: +"The exact key whose value should be tested upstream. Example: 'OPENAI_API_KEY'."
    • changedInput schema / properties / orgId / description
      Previous value: -"Org identifier for org-scoped secrets"New value: +"Organization identifier for org-scoped secrets. Required only when scope='org'. Example: 'acme-corp'."
    • changedInput schema / properties / projectPath / description
      Previous value: -"Project root path for project-scoped secrets"New value: +"Absolute path to the project root for project-scoped secrets and policy resolution. Defaults to the MCP server's current working directory when omitted."
    • changedInput schema / properties / provider / description
      Previous value: -"Force a specific provider (openai, stripe, github, aws, http)"New value: +"Force a specific provider id. Built-ins include 'openai', 'stripe', 'github', 'aws', 'http'. Omit to auto-detect from the value's prefix or the secret's stored provider hint."
    • changedInput schema / properties / scope / description
      Previous value: -"Scope: global, project, team, or org"New value: +"Where the secret lives. 'global' = user keyring (default if omitted on reads), 'project' = scoped to projectPath, 'team' = team-shared (needs teamId), 'org' = org-shared (needs orgId)."
    • changedInput schema / properties / teamId / description
      Previous value: -"Team identifier for team-scoped secrets"New value: +"Team identifier for team-scoped secrets. Required only when scope='team'. Example: 'acme-platform'."
  2. Changed4 schema fields changedv0.11.5
    • addedInput schema / properties / orgId
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Org identifier for org-scoped secrets",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / scope / description
      Previous value: -"Scope: global or project"New value: +"Scope: global, project, team, or org"
    • changedInput schema / properties / scope / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "global",
-  "project"
-]New value: +[
+  "global",
+  "project",
+  "team",
+  "org"
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / teamId
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Team identifier for team-scoped secrets",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. Addedv0.1.1

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations (which only give readOnly/openWorld/idempotent/destructive hints) by disclosing the outbound network request per call, possible provider rate-limit cost, the 'read' audit-log entry, and the guarantee the value itself is never logged. It even sketches the return JSON shape. This is rich, non-redundant behavioral context.

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 purpose and free of filler, but it is a dense single paragraph bundling usage, side effects, and return shape. All content is useful, though slightly more than is strictly necessary for a scan.

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?

For a complex network-touching tool with no output schema, the description supplies the missing pieces: the side effect, the audit implication, and an inline return-shape sketch. An agent has everything needed to invoke and interpret it correctly.

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 schema already documents every parameter including scope, orgId/teamId conditionals, and provider auto-detection. The description mentions providers but adds no syntax or constraint detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Test whether a stored secret is still accepted by its upstream service') and explains the mechanism ('minimal authenticated request'). It also distinguishes itself from siblings by naming rotate_secret and ci_validate_secrets, so an agent can route without opening schemas.

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 gives when-to-use ('confirm liveness before relying on a credential' or 'verification step after rotate_secret') and names the alternative with its selection condition ('prefer ci_validate_secrets for a batch run across every key in scope'). Nothing is left 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