Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@proof-holdings/mcp-server

@proof-holdings/mcp-server

Official
by ProofHoldings
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

test_verify

Auto-complete verification in test mode using pk_test_* API keys, enabling flow testing without real OTP delivery.

Instructions

Auto-complete a verification in test mode (pk_test_* API keys only). Useful for testing flows without real OTP delivery.

ACCESS: needs a Proof account. Set PROOF_API_KEY and restart this server, then call this tool again. start_login does NOT open this tool.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesVerification ID

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesMongoDB ObjectId
typeYesType of asset being verified. Not yet available — no channel of theirs can be completed, so a create or start answers 400 `channel_not_available`: social, wallet, account.
statusYes
channelYesChannel used for verification. Not yet available — a create or start naming one answers 400 `channel_not_available`: github, google, facebook, x, linkedin, instagram, youtube, tiktok, ethereum, solana, bitcoin, coinbase, kraken.
test_modeYes
identifierYes
proof_tokenYes
verified_atYes
proof_expires_atYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.7.2
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": {},
+  "properties": {
+    "channel": {
+      "description": "Channel used for verification. Not yet available — a create or start naming one answers 400 `channel_not_available`: github, google, facebook, x, linkedin, instagram, youtube, tiktok, ethereum, solana, bitcoin, coinbase, kraken.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "id": {
+      "description": "MongoDB ObjectId",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "identifier": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "proof_expires_at": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "proof_token": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "test_mode": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "type": {
+      "description": "Type of asset being verified. Not yet available — no channel of theirs can be completed, so a create or start answers 400 `channel_not_available`: social, wallet, account.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "verified_at": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "id",
+    "type",
+    "channel",
+    "status",
+    "identifier",
+    "verified_at",
+    "proof_token",
+    "proof_expires_at",
+    "test_mode"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the state-mutating nature is already signalled and the description does not contradict it. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond the annotations: the test-key requirement, the need for PROOF_API_KEY, and the server-restart step. It stops short of describing what a live-key call does or what failure looks like.

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?

Two tight sentences with the mode constraint and purpose front-loaded, then a clearly labelled ACCESS block. Nothing is padded, though the 'then call this tool again' phrasing is slightly awkward as a standing definition for an agent.

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?

For a single-parameter, output-schema-backed tool with annotations present, the definition covers the operational essentials: test-key scope, auth setup, and a known false lead (start_login). Return values need not be explained given the output schema, leaving little material missing.

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?

There is only one parameter and schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents 'id' as a Verification ID. The description adds no extra meaning about where that ID comes from (create_verification, trigger_verification) or how it is formatted, so the baseline applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource ('Auto-complete a verification') and scopes it to test mode with pk_test_* keys. That mode constraint is what separates it from adjacent verification tools such as trigger_verification or submit_verification_code, though none of those siblings are named directly.

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?

It gives a clear use case ('testing flows without real OTP delivery') and the hard precondition of pk_test_* keys. It also pre-empts a plausible wrong turn by stating 'start_login does NOT open this tool', which is real alternative guidance, but it never tells the agent when to prefer a non-test sibling.

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