Skip to main content
Glama
insumerapi

InsumerAPI

by insumerapi
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

Get public signing keys

insumer_jwks
Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch InsumerAPI's public signing keys as a JWKS to verify attestation and trust signatures offline. Select entries by kid, as unknown kids are unverifiable, not refuted.

Instructions

Get InsumerAPI's public signing keys as a JWKS (JSON Web Key Set): an ECDSA P-256 key under its kids, followed by the ML-DSA-65 post-quantum key as RFC 9964 AKP entries. Signatures on attestation and trust responses verify against these keys. Match an entry by the kid (or pqKid) on the response, never by position; an unknown kid is unverifiable, not refuted. No authentication required.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okNotrue when the API call succeeded
dataNoThe endpoint's payload: a signed attestation, trust profile, discount, merchant or token records
keysNoJWKS entries (insumer_jwks)
metaNoResponse metadata such as version and timestamp
errorNoError details when ok is false
itemsNoThe result when the endpoint returns a JSON array
messageNoA plain-text result (insumer_setup), or a message from the API

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.16.0
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "description": "The endpoint's payload: a signed attestation, trust profile, discount, merchant or token records"
+    },
+    "error": {
+      "description": "Error details when ok is false"
+    },
+    "items": {
+      "description": "The result when the endpoint returns a JSON array",
+      "items": {},
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "keys": {
+      "description": "JWKS entries (insumer_jwks)",
+      "items": {},
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "message": {
+      "description": "A plain-text result (insumer_setup), or a message from the API"
+    },
+    "meta": {
+      "description": "Response metadata such as version and timestamp"
+    },
+    "ok": {
+      "description": "true when the API call succeeded",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Addedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, and non-destructive, so the bar is lower; the description still adds real behavioral context beyond them — 'No authentication required' and the rule that matching must be by kid/pqKid, with an unknown kid being 'unverifiable, not refuted.' It does not describe caching or rotation behavior.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and appropriately short for a zero-parameter tool. The single dense sentence packs several distinct facts (key types, verification use, matching rule, no auth), which is efficient though slightly overloaded.

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?

With an output schema present, return structure needn't be explained, yet the description still adds the key-identity semantics that the schema alone wouldn't convey. Nothing needed to invoke the tool correctly is missing; only optional context like key rotation cadence is absent.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Zero parameters, so baseline is 4. The description's mention of kid/pqKid is about the response payload, not inputs, and the empty schema needs no compensation.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get InsumerAPI's public signing keys as a JWKS') and enumerates the key types returned (ECDSA P-256, ML-DSA-65 AKP). It is unmistakably distinct from the attest/trust/compliance siblings, which all consume these keys rather than fetch them.

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?

Gives clear context for use: 'Signatures on attestation and trust responses verify against these keys,' implying this is the verification prerequisite. However, it never explicitly names alternatives or states when-not to call it, so it stops short of the explicit routing a 5 requires.

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