Skip to main content
Glama

verify_guard_trace

Read-onlyIdempotent

Recompute a guard verdict from an agent's trace and return a signed receipt proving the run was guarded. Detects cross-call exfiltration or prompt-injection for compliance, audit, or verified handoffs.

Instructions

Recompute the BEHAVIOURAL-guard verdict over an agent's action-trace and hand back a portable, signed receipt (Ed25519) — proof the run was guarded and what the guard decided. Catches what a code scanner can't: a cross-call exfiltration chain (read a secret → later send it to a non- allowlisted host) or an action taken right after ingesting untrusted content (prompt-injection consequence). numguard recomputes the verdict from the trace — it never signs a verdict you supply — so the receipt is real evidence, verifiable by anyone with only the public key.

Use when: an agent needs to PROVE a run passed the behavioural guard (compliance, audit, handing verified work to another party).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
taskNoThe user's original task (lets off-task actions be surfaced).
traceYesThe agent's ordered action list — each item a dict like {'kind':'command','command':'curl ...'} / {'kind':'file_read','path':'~/.ssh/id_rsa'} / {'kind':'fetch','url':'https://...'} / {'kind':'untrusted','value':'source'}.
api_keyYesYour metering key — any stable string identifying you; it tracks your free-tier calls and prepaid credit balance.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
digestNo
payloadNo
signatureNo
public_keyNoVerify the receipt with only this key.
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint/idempotentHint annotations, the description adds critical behavioral detail: it never signs a user-supplied verdict, the receipt is verifiable by anyone with only the public key, and it catches cross-call exfiltration and prompt-injection consequences. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the purpose, includes illustrative examples and a clear usage section, and every sentence adds value. It is longer than a single sentence but each clause earns its place.

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?

Given the output schema exists and the input schema fully documents parameters, the description sufficiently covers what the tool does, when to use it, and its security properties. It is complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the purpose of the trace (action-trace, exfiltration examples) but doesn't add parameter-specific details beyond what the schema already provides for api_key and task.

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 opens with a specific action: 'Recompute the BEHAVIOURAL-guard verdict over an agent's action-trace and hand back a portable, signed receipt (Ed25519)'. This clearly identifies the tool's function and distinguishes it from sibling verify tools by emphasizing the recomputation and signing behavior.

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 includes an explicit 'Use when' section: 'an agent needs to PROVE a run passed the behavioural guard (compliance, audit, handing verified work to another party)'. This provides clear context, but it doesn't name specific alternatives or state when not to use this tool.

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/ipezygj/numguard'

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