Skip to main content
Glama

verify_pr_range

Verify signed and unsigned commits across a pull request commit range, supporting both hosted and offline verification modes.

Instructions

Scroll Gate: verify signed/unsigned commits across a PR commit range.

Hosted mode (default): calls ssx360.com with SSX360_API_KEY.
Set source=local|notes|bundle to verify offline without an API key.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
baseNoRange start Git ref (exclusive), typically origin/main.origin/main
headNoRange end Git ref (inclusive), e.g. HEAD or a PR head SHA.HEAD
sourceNoEnvelope transport: hosted Scroll Gate (default, requires SSX360_API_KEY), local files, git notes, or bundle dir for offline verification.hosted
notes_refNoGit notes ref when source=notes, default refs/notes/matrixscroll.refs/notes/matrixscroll
workspaceNoGit repository root. Empty auto-detects from the working directory.
bundle_dirNoDirectory containing exported envelope bundles when source=bundle.
require_modeNoOptional policy require_mode filter applied to every commit in the range.
deny_actor_typesNoOptional deny-list of provenance.actor_type values.
trusted_keys_fileNoOptional JSON file of trusted public keys for the range check.
require_actor_typesNoOptional allow-list of provenance.actor_type values.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

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 disclosing behavioral traits. It mentions that hosted mode 'calls ssx360.com' (network call) and requires SSX360_API_KEY, but it does not specify whether the operation is read-only, what errors may occur, or any destructive potential. The safety profile is unclear.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that front-load the core purpose and then detail a key behavioral choice (hosted vs offline). Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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 (10 parameters, multiple modes, output schema exists), the description covers the main behavioral context (mode selection and API key requirement). It could benefit from a brief note on return values, but the presence of an output schema mitigates this. Overall, it is mostly complete for an AI agent to understand how to invoke it.

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% with all 10 parameters having descriptions. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema; it only explains the high-level purpose of modes. Since the schema already provides detailed parameter explanations, the description's contribution is limited.

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 tool's function: 'verify signed/unsigned commits across a PR commit range.' It uses a specific verb ('verify') and resource ('PR commit range'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like verify_envelope which likely operates on individual envelopes rather than commit ranges.

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?

The description provides some guidance on when to use different source modes (hosted vs offline), explaining that hosted requires an API key and offline modes (local, notes, bundle) do not. However, it does not explicitly compare this tool to siblings like verify_envelope or advise against using this tool in certain scenarios, such as when only a single envelope needs 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/SSX360/matrixscroll'

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