Skip to main content
Glama

w3_proof_add

Add CAR-encoded proof files using absolute paths with the w3_proof_add operation on the mcp-ipfs server, enabling secure data delegation and management.

Instructions

Tool for w3_proof_add operation. Requires ABSOLUTE paths for file arguments.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
proofPathYesABSOLUTE path to the CAR encoded proof file delegated to this agent.

Implementation Reference

  • Implements the core logic for the w3_proof_add tool: validates input arguments using the schema, runs the 'w3 proof add' CLI command with the proofPath, and formats the stdout output into a MCP response.
    const handleW3ProofAdd: ToolHandler = async (args) => {
      const parsed = Schemas.W3ProofAddArgsSchema.safeParse(args);
      if (!parsed.success)
        throw new Error(
          `Invalid arguments for w3_proof_add: ${parsed.error.message}`
        );
      const { proofPath } = parsed.data;
      const { stdout } = await runW3Command(`proof add "${proofPath}"`);
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: "text",
            text: JSON.stringify({
              message: `Successfully added proof from ${proofPath}.`,
              output: stdout.trim(),
            }),
          },
        ],
      };
  • Defines the Zod input validation schema for w3_proof_add, requiring a single 'proofPath' string parameter describing the absolute path to the proof file.
    export const W3ProofAddArgsSchema = z.object({
      proofPath: z
        .string()
        .describe(
          "ABSOLUTE path to the CAR encoded proof file delegated to this agent."
        ),
    });
  • Registers the 'w3_proof_add' tool by mapping its name to the handleW3ProofAdd handler function in the exported toolHandlers object, which is used by the MCP server to dispatch tool calls.
    export const toolHandlers: Record<string, ToolHandler> = {
      w3_login: handleW3Login,
      w3_space_ls: handleW3SpaceLs,
      w3_space_use: handleW3SpaceUse,
      w3_space_create: handleW3SpaceCreate,
      w3_up: handleW3Up,
      w3_ls: handleW3Ls,
      w3_rm: handleW3Rm,
      w3_open: handleW3Open,
      w3_space_info: handleW3SpaceInfo,
      w3_space_add: handleW3SpaceAdd,
      w3_delegation_create: handleW3DelegationCreate,
      w3_delegation_ls: handleW3DelegationLs,
      w3_delegation_revoke: handleW3DelegationRevoke,
      w3_proof_add: handleW3ProofAdd,
      w3_proof_ls: handleW3ProofLs,
      w3_key_create: handleW3KeyCreate,
      w3_bridge_generate_tokens: handleW3BridgeGenerateTokens,
      w3_can_blob_add: handleW3CanBlobAdd,
      w3_can_blob_ls: handleW3CanBlobLs,
      w3_can_blob_rm: handleW3CanBlobRm,
      w3_can_index_add: handleW3CanIndexAdd,
      w3_can_upload_add: handleW3CanUploadAdd,
      w3_can_upload_ls: handleW3CanUploadLs,
      w3_can_upload_rm: handleW3CanUploadRm,
      w3_plan_get: handleW3PlanGet,
      w3_account_ls: handleW3AccountLs,
      w3_space_provision: handleW3SpaceProvision,
      w3_coupon_create: handleW3CouponCreate,
      w3_usage_report: handleW3UsageReport,
      w3_can_access_claim: handleW3CanAccessClaim,
      w3_can_store_add: handleW3CanStoreAdd,
      w3_can_store_ls: handleW3CanStoreLs,
      w3_can_store_rm: handleW3CanStoreRm,
      w3_can_filecoin_info: handleW3CanFilecoinInfo,
      w3_reset: handleW3Reset,
    };
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that the tool 'requires ABSOLUTE paths for file arguments', which is a useful constraint. However, it doesn't disclose whether this is a read or write operation, what permissions are needed, what side effects occur, or what the expected output looks like. For a tool with no annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is brief and to the point with two sentences. The first sentence is redundant, but the second provides critical information about path requirements. There's no unnecessary verbosity, though it could be more informative about the tool's purpose.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a tool with no annotations, no output schema, and a single parameter, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain what 'w3_proof_add' operation does, what a 'proof' is in this context, or what the expected outcome is. The absolute path requirement is helpful but doesn't compensate for the lack of core operational context.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with the 'proofPath' parameter clearly documented as 'ABSOLUTE path to the CAR encoded proof file delegated to this agent'. The description adds the requirement for 'ABSOLUTE paths for file arguments', which reinforces but doesn't significantly expand upon the schema. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Tool for w3_proof_add operation' is a tautology that merely restates the tool name. It adds the requirement for 'ABSOLUTE paths for file arguments', which provides some context but doesn't explain what the operation actually does. Compared to sibling tools like 'w3_proof_ls' (likely listing proofs) and 'w3_delegation_create' (creating delegations), the purpose remains vague.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions the requirement for absolute paths but doesn't specify prerequisites, dependencies, or appropriate contexts. Given sibling tools like 'w3_proof_ls' and 'w3_delegation_create', there's no indication of how this tool relates to them or when it should be selected.

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

Related 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/alexbakers/mcp-ipfs'

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