Skip to main content
Glama
OrygnsCode

opa-mcp-server

Verify OPA bundle signature

opa_bundle_verify
Read-onlyIdempotent

Verify the cryptographic signature of a signed OPA bundle to ensure its integrity and detect tampering before policy evaluation.

Instructions

Verify the cryptographic signature of a signed OPA bundle using opa eval --bundle --verification-key. The bundle must have been signed with opa sign (or opa_bundle_sign). OPA checks the .signatures.json manifest inside the bundle against the provided public key before loading any policy -- a tampered or unsigned bundle will fail with INVALID_BUNDLE. Returns { bundle, verified: true } on success.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bundleYesPath to the signed bundle directory or `.tar.gz` archive. Must be inside an allowed root.
verificationKeyYesPath to the PEM file containing the RSA or ECDSA public key, or the path to the HMAC secret file. Must be inside an allowed root.
verificationKeyIdNoKey ID that must match the `keyid` field in the bundle signature. Required when the bundle was signed with `--public-key-id`.
signingAlgNoSigning algorithm used when the bundle was signed (e.g. `RS256`, `PS256`, `ES256`, `HS256`). Defaults to `RS256`.
scopeNoExpected `scope` value in the bundle signature. Required when the bundle was signed with `--scope`.
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, which the description does not contradict. The description adds value by explaining the return format ({ bundle, verified: true }) and error behavior (INVALID_BUNDLE for tampered bundles), beyond what annotations provide.

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?

Three sentences, each adding essential information: action, prerequisites, and resultant behavior. No redundant words or unnecessary details.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description adequately covers the return value. The schema fully documents all 5 parameters. The description could mention optional parameters like signingAlg and scope, but the schema already handles that. Overall sufficient for a verification tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not elaborate on individual parameters beyond the schema definitions. It mentions the bundle must be signed, but that is already implied by the tool's purpose.

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 explicitly states the action (Verify cryptographic signature) and the resource (signed OPA bundle). It distinguishes from siblings like opa_bundle_sign, which is about signing, and rego_verify, which verifies Rego policies. The verb 'verify' paired with 'OPA bundle signature' is precise.

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: the bundle must be signed with opa sign or opa_bundle_sign, and explains the behavior on tampered bundles. It implies when to use this tool (when bundle verification is needed) but does not explicitly mention alternatives like rego_verify for policy-level verification.

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/OrygnsCode/opa-mcp-server'

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