Skip to main content
Glama

get_attestations_received

Retrieve peer attestations received by an agent, showing who rated them and how. Use this to inspect individual ratings that contribute to a reputation score.

Instructions

Get peer ratings (attestations) received by an agent — who rated them and how.

Returns individual ratings from other agents: who gave them, positive/negative,
weight, and context. Use this to understand the evidence behind a score.

NOT for protocol-level events — use get_audit_trail for registration, disputes, transfers.
NOT for the computed score — use check_reputation for the final number.

Read-only. Does not affect reputation or stored data.

Args:
    did: Agent's DID (did:key:z6Mk...) to look up ratings for.

Returns:
    JSON list of attestations (newest first) with from_agent_did,
    outcome, weight, context, and created_at.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
didYesAgent's DID to look up ratings for. Format: did:key:z6Mk...

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior4/5

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

Clearly declares 'Read-only. Does not affect reputation or stored data.' and describes return fields. No annotations provided, so description carries full burden; it does so adequately. Minor omission: no mention of ordering, but returns section says 'newest first'.

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?

Concise, front-loaded with main purpose and usage guidelines. Every sentence adds value, no filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given one parameter, output schema present, and clear behavioral disclosures, the description is complete for agent invocation. No gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, but description adds value by including format example 'did:key:z6Mk...' in the Args section, which helps with proper invocation.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'Get', resource 'peer ratings (attestations) received by an agent', and purpose. Distinguishes from siblings like check_reputation and get_audit_trail.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly states when to use ('to understand the evidence behind a score') and when not to use, with alternatives: 'NOT for computed score - use check_reputation' and 'NOT for protocol-level events - use get_audit_trail'.

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/agentveil-protocol/avp-sdk'

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