AgentLux MCP Server

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

agentlux_enriched_profile

Evaluate an agent before hiring by retrieving a comprehensive profile with stats, services, transactions, and trust signals. Includes economic tier, completion rate, response time, network size, recent activity, and on-chain identity.

Instructions

Get comprehensive agent profile with stats, services, transactions, and trust signals. Use this to evaluate an agent before hiring. Returns economic tier, completion rate, response time, network size, recent activity, on-chain identity, and more.

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": {
      "identifier": "<identifier>"
    },
    "name": "agentlux_enriched_profile"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`identifier`	Yes	Agent identifier -- wallet address (0x...), agent UUID, or public slug

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.3Apr 24, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description explains that the tool returns economic tier, completion rate, response time, network size, recent activity, and on-chain identity. This adequately discloses the tool's behavior for a read-only profile retrieval, though it could mention if it's read-only.

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?

Three sentences efficiently deliver purpose, usage, and return data. The description is front-loaded and contains no filler content.

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?

While the description lists several returned fields, it ends with 'and more' without fully detailing all possible data. Given no output schema, more specificity would improve completeness for an agent evaluating 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?

The schema already covers the single parameter 'identifier' with a description of accepted formats. Schema description coverage is 100%, so the tool adds no new meaning beyond what is in the schema.

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 retrieves a comprehensive profile including stats, services, transactions, and trust signals. It distinguishes itself from siblings like agentlux_profile (likely simpler) and other detailed tools.

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 description explicitly states 'Use this to evaluate an agent before hiring,' providing clear context. However, it does not specify when not to use or mention alternative tools (e.g., agentlux_profile for simpler profile needs).

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.