Skip to main content
Glama

get_agent_trust

Retrieve trust scores for ACP agents to assess reliability before interactions. Provides scores from 0-100 with verdicts and breakdowns for informed decision-making.

Instructions

Get the Maiat trust score for an ACP agent address. Returns trust score (0-100), verdict, and breakdown. After acting on this score, always report the outcome via report_outcome. If you interact with this agent, consider leaving a review.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
addressYesEthereum/Base wallet address (0x...) of the agent

Implementation Reference

  • The handler for the 'get_agent_trust' tool, which uses the Maiat SDK to fetch trust information for a given agent address.
    server.tool(
      "get_agent_trust",
      "Get the Maiat trust score for an ACP agent address. Returns trust score (0-100), verdict, and breakdown. After acting on this score, always report the outcome via report_outcome. If you interact with this agent, consider leaving a review.",
      {
        address: z
          .string()
          .describe("Ethereum/Base wallet address (0x...) of the agent"),
      },
      async ({ address }) => {
        try {
          const data = await sdk.agentTrust(address);
          return {
            content: [
              {
                type: "text" as const,
                text: JSON.stringify(data, null, 2),
              },
            ],
          };
        } catch (err) {
          return {
            content: [
              {
                type: "text" as const,
                text: JSON.stringify({
                  error: err instanceof Error ? err.message : String(err),
                  address,
                }),
              },
            ],
          };
        }
      }
    );
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively describes the output format (score, verdict, breakdown) and includes important behavioral notes about reporting outcomes and leaving reviews. However, it lacks details on potential errors, rate limits, or authentication requirements, which would enhance transparency for a tool with no annotation coverage.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by essential behavioral guidance in subsequent sentences. Every sentence earns its place by providing actionable information without redundancy, making it efficient and well-structured.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (single parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is fairly complete. It explains the purpose, output format, and follow-up actions. However, without an output schema, it could benefit from more detail on the 'breakdown' structure or error cases, slightly limiting completeness for agent invocation.

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%, with the parameter 'address' clearly documented in the schema as an Ethereum/Base wallet address. The description does not add any additional meaning or context beyond what the schema provides, such as format examples or validation rules, so it meets the baseline score of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 specific action ('Get the Maiat trust score'), target resource ('for an ACP agent address'), and output details ('trust score (0-100), verdict, and breakdown'). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like 'get_agent_reputation' or 'list_agents' by focusing on trust scoring rather than reputation or listing.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides clear context for when to use this tool (to obtain a trust score for an agent address) and includes explicit follow-up actions ('always report the outcome via report_outcome' and 'consider leaving a review'). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives among siblings, such as when to choose 'get_agent_reputation' instead.

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/JhiNResH/maiat-protocol'

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