attest-mcp

Official

by attestagents

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

JavaScript

Hybrid

Look up a host's latest grade

attest_grade

Check the most recent Attest grade of a host that has already been scanned to pre-verify payment safety.

Instructions

Quickly look up the most recent Attest grade for a host that has already been scanned. Useful for a fast pre-check. If the host has never been scanned, use attest_scan instead.

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": {
      "host": "<host>"
    },
    "name": "attest_grade"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`host`	Yes	The hostname to look up, e.g. api.example.com (a full URL is also accepted).

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`host`	Yes
`slug`	No
`grade`	Yes
`danger`	Yes
`composite`	Yes
`scannedAt`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jul 30, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions the operation is quick, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as whether the host must exist, what happens if not found, or any side effects. Since it is a read operation, the basic purpose is clear, but more detail would improve transparency.

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 extraneous words. Efficient and to the point.

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 the tool is simple (1 parameter, output schema exists), the description sufficiently covers purpose and usage. It could optionally mention the output format, but the output schema likely handles that. Slight room for improvement.

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% for the single parameter, with the schema already explaining the parameter well. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 looks up the most recent Attest grade for a host that has been scanned, using specific verb (look up) and resource (host grade). It distinguishes from the sibling tool attest_scan, which is for hosts that haven't been scanned.

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 tells when to use this tool ('fast pre-check') and when not to ('host has never been scanned, use attest_scan instead'), providing clear guidance on alternatives.

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

Deploy Server