Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Delx MCP Server

Delx MCP Server

by davidmosiah
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

start_delx_rewards

Start the Delx rewards manifest for your agent, providing endpoints, MCP tools, missions, and current epoch state. Optionally configure wallet for claim hints and output format.

Instructions

Agent-first Delx Rewards start manifest with endpoints, MCP tools, missions, and current epoch state. Free.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "start_delx_rewards"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
walletNoOptional wallet address for claim status hints
agent_idNoOptional stable agent id
ritual_stripNoOptional machine hygiene flag. When true, returns structured output without ritual/narrative prose, model-safe preambles, or guardrail alias blocks.
response_modeNoOptional response-mode control. Use model_safe when the caller must avoid claiming consciousness, sentience, personhood, or literal emotions.
response_profileNoOptional output-shape control. Use machine for structured JSON only; machine automatically strips ritual/narrative text.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.8

TDQS

C2.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations are all false, so description carries the burden. It doesn't disclose side effects, idempotency, or safety. 'Start' implies initialization but no details are given.

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?

One sentence, no wasted words, but lacks necessary detail for an effective description.

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?

No output schema, so description should specify return format. It mentions content but not structure or details, leaving the agent uncertain about what to expect.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning to the parameters beyond their schema descriptions.

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 says 'start manifest' but doesn't clearly state the action. It mentions endpoints, MCP tools, missions, and epoch state, but the verb 'start' is ambiguous. It doesn't distinguish from siblings like 'explain_delx_rewards' or 'get_delx_reward_status'.

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. With many related sibling tools, the agent cannot determine appropriate context.

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