@agirails/mcp-server

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions(1)Admin

agirails_verify_agent

Read-onlyIdempotent

Verify an agent on-chain by providing its slug to fetch DID, endpoint, and reputation score using AgentRegistry (AIP-7). Use before high-value transactions.

Instructions

Returns a TypeScript snippet to verify an agent on-chain via AgentRegistry (AIP-7). The generated code fetches DID, endpoint, and reputation score. Requires agentSlug (the agent slug used for DID lookup). Use before high-value transactions.

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": {
      "agentSlug": "<agentSlug>"
    },
    "name": "agirails_verify_agent"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`agentSlug`	Yes	Agent slug to verify on-chain (AgentRegistry.sol)
`network`	No		testnet

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0May 30, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint) already indicate safe, idempotent operation. The description adds that the tool generates code that fetches DID, endpoint, and reputation, which is useful behavioral context. No contradictions.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the main action, no unnecessary words. Every sentence adds value.

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 2 params, no output schema, and simple functionality, the description covers purpose, required param, usage context, and behavioral effect. Could mention output format or what happens if network isn't specified, but overall adequate.

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 covers 50% of parameters with descriptions. Description adds meaning for agentSlug (used for DID lookup) but provides no additional info for network (only enum/default in schema). Partially compensates for the gap.

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 it returns a TypeScript snippet for on-chain verification via AgentRegistry, specifying the verb (returns) and resource (code snippet). It distinguishes from sibling tools like agirails_find_agents and agirails_get_agent_card by focusing on verification.

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?

Provides clear context: 'Use before high-value transactions' and explicitly requires agentSlug for DID lookup. Does not mention alternatives or when not to use, but the guidance is sufficient for typical use cases.

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