Retrieves the Verfi SDK integration snippet and setup instructions for capturing consent on a web form, optionally personalized with your public API key.
Get the Verfi SDK integration snippet and setup instructions for capturing consent on a web form.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| publicKey | No | Your Verfi public API key (pk_). If not provided, returns generic instructions. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. The verb 'Get' implies a read-only operation and the description says it returns a snippet and instructions, but it does not explicitly confirm safety profile, permissions, or rate-limit behavior.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single efficient sentence with the main purpose front-loaded. Every part contributes useful information and there is no filler.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple getter with one optional, fully described parameter and no output schema, the description adequately says what is returned: an SDK integration snippet and setup instructions. Minor behavioral details are missing, but nothing critical prevents correct invocation.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
There is one optional parameter and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains publicKey and its fallback behavior. The description adds no parameter-specific details beyond what is in the schema, making the baseline score of 3 appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states a specific verb and resource: get the Verfi SDK integration snippet and setup instructions. It also scopes the purpose to consent capture on a web form, which distinguishes it from the session, proof, and claim siblings, though the name verfi_add_sdk is slightly less precise than the described action.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The phrase 'for capturing consent on a web form' implies the intended usage context, but it does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus alternatives or mention prerequisites. No exclusions or alternative tools are named.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.