Skip to main content
Glama

bardo_attestation_issue

Issue a verifiable attestation that can be verified offline. Supports optional subject identification and expiration dates.

Instructions

Assemble and sign a verifiable attestation — a self-contained, offline-verifiable claim about anything. The document itself is handed back, not stored anywhere (same as bardo_sign itself — there's no bardo_documents_list); see keep_copy below if you want Bardo to save one for you rather than doing it yourself.

claim: free-form claim content — whatever you're asserting. Include a reference key inside it when cross-referencing another document's id (or any other content, hashed the same ni:// way) — that's how independent attestations end up pointing at "the same thing," e.g. several agents witnessing one event under a shared reference. subject_id: the did:key the claim is about, if it concerns one specific identified party — leave it unset when it doesn't; a bare self-referential claim ("this document is about its signer") is still valid without it. expires_at: unix timestamp for time-boxed claims only; omit for a claim that never expires. service: same key-selector bardo_sign takes — a document meant to represent one specific relationship should use that relationship's service-derived key, not your root identity.

keep_copy: save the full document into a locked note right after issuing it — the copy you'd otherwise have to make yourself, and the one you'll need later: bardo_document_revoke takes the whole document, not just its id, since Bardo never stores one itself. Off by default. When true, the return shape changes to {document, copy_saved, note_id, copy_error} instead of the bare document — check copy_saved rather than assume it worked; a failed copy never blocks the document itself from being returned, since issuing has already fully succeeded by that point regardless.

To revoke later: bardo_document_revoke. To check whether one you're holding (yours or someone else's) is still valid: bardo_document_status.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
claimNo
serviceNo
keep_copyNo
expires_atNo
subject_idNo
session_tokenNo
Behavior5/5

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

The description thoroughly explains behavioral traits not in annotations: document is not stored, return shape changes with keep_copy, copy failure doesn't block document return. Annotations (all false) are consistent with the description.

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 well-structured and front-loaded, but somewhat lengthy due to detailed parameter explanations. Every sentence adds value, though some redundancy could be trimmed.

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?

The description is comprehensive for a tool with 6 nullable parameters and no output schema: explains return behavior with/without keep_copy, references related tools, and provides examples for parameter usage.

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

Parameters5/5

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

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully explains all parameters: claim (free-form, reference), subject_id, expires_at, service, keep_copy (including return shape). Only session_token is not described but likely internal.

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's purpose: 'Assemble and sign a verifiable attestation — a self-contained, offline-verifiable claim about anything.' It distinguishes from siblings like bardo_sign and bardo_document_revoke.

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?

The description implicitly indicates when to use (to issue an attestation) and references related tools for revoke and status. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternative tools for similar tasks beyond those mentioned.

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/calebe/bardo'

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