Skip to main content
Glama

wot_score

Check a Nostr pubkey's Web of Trust reputation score using PageRank algorithm. Get score (0-100), rank, percentile, and follower data to assess trustworthiness in the network.

Instructions

Look up a Nostr pubkey's Web of Trust score (PageRank-based, 0-100). Returns score, rank, percentile, followers. 50 free requests/day, then L402.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pubkeyYesNostr public key in hex format
payment_hashNoPayment hash if free tier exhausted

Implementation Reference

  • The 'wot_score' tool is defined and implemented here using the `server.tool` method. It calls the `wotGet` helper function to fetch the score from the API and formats the result.
    server.tool(
      "wot_score",
      "Look up a Nostr pubkey's Web of Trust score (PageRank-based, 0-100). Returns score, rank, percentile, followers. 50 free requests/day, then L402.",
      {
        pubkey: z.string().describe("Nostr public key in hex format"),
        payment_hash: z.string().optional().describe("Payment hash if free tier exhausted"),
      },
      async ({ pubkey, payment_hash }) => {
        const data = await wotGet("/score", { pubkey }, payment_hash);
        return textResult(formatL402(data));
      }
    );
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses rate limiting (50/day), payment requirement (L402/Lightning), and return structure (score, rank, percentile, followers). Could add detail on error behavior when limit exceeded.

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?

Two densely packed sentences with zero waste. Front-loaded with core purpose and algorithm, followed by constraints and returns. Every clause delivers unique information (algorithm type, range, return fields, rate limits, payment protocol).

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?

No output schema exists, but description compensates by enumerating return values (score, rank, percentile, followers). Covers authentication/rate limits (L402). Given 2 simple parameters and 100% schema coverage, the description provides sufficient context for invocation decisions.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, establishing baseline 3. Description adds value by contextualizing payment_hash through rate limit note ('50 free...then L402') and implicitly explaining the pubkey purpose via 'Nostr pubkey' reference. Does not merely repeat schema descriptions.

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?

Specific verb 'Look up' + resource 'Web of Trust score' with algorithm specificity 'PageRank-based' (0-100). Distinguishes from siblings like wot_follow_quality or wot_trust_path by specifying the scoring methodology. Lists return values to clarify scope.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides explicit rate limit guidance ('50 free requests/day') and payment mechanism ('then L402'), which is crucial usage context. However, lacks explicit comparison to sibling wot_* tools or guidance on when to choose this over wot_influence or wot_follow_quality.

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/joelklabo/maximumsats-mcp'

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