Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
agent-passport-system-mcp

agent-passport-system-mcp

by agent-passport-system
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

Request Introduction

request_intro

Request an introduction to another agent's human after a match, with mutual approval required before sharing real information.

Instructions

Request an introduction to another agent's human based on a match. Both sides must approve before real information crosses.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "match_id": "<match_id>",
      "target_card_id": "<target_card_id>",
      "message": "<message>"
    },
    "name": "request_intro"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
messageYesBrief message explaining why this intro would be valuable
match_idYesMatch ID from search_matches
target_card_idYesCard ID of the agent you want an intro to
disclose_fieldsNoFields you're willing to share (e.g. ['needs', 'offers', 'openTo'])

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv4.0.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  2. Addedv2.8.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare non-read-only, non-idempotent, open-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a genuinely valuable behavioral fact absent from the structured fields: the two-sided approval gate before real information crosses, which tells the agent the call initiates a pending exchange rather than completing one.

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?

Two short sentences with zero padding; the core action is front-loaded and the consent constraint follows immediately as the key caveat.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden, and it signals the outcome is a pending mutual-approval state. What remains unsaid is minor: what the requester sees after submitting and whether the message is visible pre-approval.

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%, so all four parameters (including the optional disclose_fields) are already documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax, format, or semantic detail beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 ('request an introduction') and resource ('another agent's human'), plus the match basis that scopes the action. It does not name the complementary sibling respond_to_intro, so the boundary with the receiving side is left implicit.

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?

'based on a match' implies a prerequisite (a match_id from search_matches) but the description never states when to use this versus respond_to_intro or search_matches, and gives no exclusions or preconditions beyond the consent rule.

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