Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
zyta-sign-mcp

zyta-sign-mcp

by blanck1945
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Verificar PDF subido

kairo_verify_document

Upload a PDF and verify its signature using a signature ID or JSON certificate. Confirm document authenticity and integrity.

Instructions

Sube un PDF y verifica contra signatureId o certificado JSON.

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": {
      "pdfBase64": "<pdfBase64>"
    },
    "name": "kairo_verify_document"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pdfBase64Yes
signatureIdNo
certificateJsonNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.0

TDQS

C2.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description must fully convey behavior. It only states upload and verify, omitting side effects (e.g., PDF storage), verification result format, and whether it is read-only or destructive.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is very short but mixed English/Spanish. It conveys purpose without extra words but lacks structure and could be more precise.

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

Completeness1/5

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

With no output schema, the return value is entirely unaddressed. The description does not cover what a successful verification returns, error conditions, or parameter constraints.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%. The description mentions signatureId and certificateJson but does not explain their format or relationship to pdfBase64. pdfBase64 is not described as base64-encoded PDF content.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the verb 'upload PDF and verify' and the resources 'signatureId' or 'JSON certificate'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'kairo_verify_signature' by specifying the verification method. However, 'verify' could be more specific (e.g., check authenticity or integrity).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, or when to choose signatureId over certificateJson. Prerequisites (e.g., needing a prior signature to get signatureId) are not mentioned.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools