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

@proof-holdings/mcp-server

Official
by ProofHoldings
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

update_profile_proofs

Destructive

Update which verified proofs display on a specific profile and control visibility, privacy masking, ordering, and labels. Use it to manage what profile viewers can see.

Instructions

Update which verified assets (proofs) are displayed on a specific profile. Controls visibility, privacy masking, ordering, and labels.

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
proofsYesProofs to display on profile
profile_idYesProfile ID
proof_orderNoWho orders the shown proofs: `default` (domain, social, Telegram bot, email, phone, wallet, then display_order) or `owner` (display_order alone). Omitted, the profile keeps its current setting.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
proof_orderYesWho decided the order of a profile's proofs. `default`: domain, social account, Telegram bot, email, phone, wallet, then each proof's `display_order`. `owner`: the owner's `display_order` alone — send it when the owner reorders. The first shown proof that is not hidden leads the profile's preview card, share tags and badge. Omitted on an update, the profile keeps its current setting.
public_proofsYesThe shown proofs, in the order the public profile shows them

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changedv1.7.2
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / properties / proof_order
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Who orders the shown proofs: `default` (domain, social, Telegram bot, email, phone, wallet, then display_order) or `owner` (display_order alone). Omitted, the profile keeps its current setting.",
+  "enum": [
+    "default",
+    "owner"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / proofs / items / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / properties / proofs / items / properties / display_order / maximum
      Added value: +9007199254740991
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": {},
+  "description": "A sub-account's shown proofs after an update",
+  "properties": {
+    "proof_order": {
+      "description": "Who decided the order of a profile's proofs. `default`: domain, social account, Telegram bot, email, phone, wallet, then each proof's `display_order`. `owner`: the owner's `display_order` alone — send it when the owner reorders. The first shown proof that is not hidden leads the profile's preview card, share tags and badge. Omitted on an update, the profile keeps its current setting.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "public_proofs": {
+      "description": "The shown proofs, in the order the public profile shows them",
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": {},
+        "properties": {
+          "asset_id": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "channel": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "delegate_type": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "delegation_id": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "display_order": {
+            "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+            "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+            "type": "integer"
+          },
+          "display_value": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "is_revoked": {
+            "type": "boolean"
+          },
+          "is_visible": {
+            "type": "boolean"
+          },
+          "label": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "mask_level": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "verified_at": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "asset_id",
+          "type",
+          "display_value",
+          "verified_at",
+          "is_visible",
+          "display_order",
+          "mask_level"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "public_proofs",
+    "proof_order"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, so the safety profile is known. The description adds real value with the account/restart prerequisite, but it never explains the destructive mechanics: whether the proofs array replaces the entire existing set, what happens to proofs omitted from it, or whether visibility changes are reversible. For a flagged-destructive mutation that is a meaningful omission.

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 blocks: purpose first, then a clearly separated ACCESS note, both front-loaded with no filler. The access block is longer than the functional description, which is slightly disproportionate but justified by the hard prerequisite.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists and annotations carry the safety profile, so the description need not explain returns. What is missing is the replacement semantics of the proofs array and any disambiguation from update_public_proofs, both of which matter for a destructive, profile-scoped write.

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 every property including the proof_order enum fully documented in the schema. The description's closing sentence ('visibility, privacy masking, ordering, and labels') merely restates those fields rather than adding format or ordering semantics, so baseline 3 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Update which verified assets (proofs) are displayed on a specific profile') and enumerates the aspects it controls. It does not differentiate itself from the very similar sibling update_public_proofs, which an agent will likely confuse it with.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Gives a strong precondition (a Proof account with PROOF_API_KEY set) and explicitly rules out start_login as a path to enabling the tool, which is genuinely useful routing information. However, it offers no guidance on when to choose this over update_public_proofs or update_profile, leaving the sibling-selection problem unresolved.

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