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

@proof-holdings/mcp-server

Official
by ProofHoldings
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

verify_2fa

Submit a verification code for a 2FA session to complete authentication. Use the session ID and code to finish the challenge; attempts are rate limited.

Instructions

Submit a verification code to complete a 2FA challenge. Rate limited to 10 attempts per minute.

ACCESS: needs a Proof account. Set PROOF_API_KEY and restart this server, or sign in with start_login — a session opens this tool — then call this tool again.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
codeYesVerification code
session_idYes2FA session ID

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
statusYes
verified_atYes
grant_expires_atYesWhen the grant this step-up stored stops being accepted
grant_single_useYesWhether the grant is spent by the first act it allows

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": {},
+  "description": "The step-up is complete and its grant stored",
+  "properties": {
+    "grant_expires_at": {
+      "description": "When the grant this step-up stored stops being accepted",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "grant_single_use": {
+      "description": "Whether the grant is spent by the first act it allows",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "verified_at": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "status",
+    "verified_at",
+    "grant_expires_at",
+    "grant_single_use"
+  ],
+  "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 only declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the rate limit of 10 attempts per minute and the authentication/session prerequisite are genuinely additive information the agent could not get elsewhere. It does not say what a failed or expired code returns, which would round out the picture.

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?

The core action and the rate limit are front-loaded in one tight sentence, with prerequisites separated into a labeled ACCESS block. The ACCESS text is somewhat boilerplate about server configuration, but it is clearly demarcated and not woven into the action description.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the description covers the two things an agent most needs: the rate limit and the auth/session requirement. Only failure behavior and code expiry are left unstated for a two-parameter flow-completion 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 description coverage is 100% for both required parameters, so the schema already carries the load. The description mentions "verification code" and the session context but adds no format, length, or expiry semantics beyond what the schema states. 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?

"Submit a verification code to complete a 2FA challenge" names a concrete action and resource, and the phrase "complete a 2FA challenge" signals this is the finishing step of a flow. It does not, however, distinguish itself from close siblings such as verify_2fa_magic_link or submit_verification_code, so an agent must infer which verification path applies.

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 ACCESS paragraph gives real preconditions: a Proof account, PROOF_API_KEY set, or a session opened by start_login. That tells the agent when the call will succeed. It stops short of explicitly ruling out alternatives like verify_2fa_magic_link or stating that start_2fa must precede it.

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