Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
vet402

vet402

by kzmttkc
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

check_wallet_trust

Check a wallet address's trust score before your agent pays it. Returns an ALLOW_PAY or REFUSE decision with a safe_to_pay flag, so you only pay wallets that clear the trust check.

Instructions

Trust check for a wallet address. Resolves ERC-8004 agents when registered. Decide on decision (ALLOW_PAY | REFUSE) and safe_to_pay (boolean); pay only on ALLOW_PAY. An error result is REFUSE too — no answer is not an ALLOW. measurement carries the full score body as evidence, not as the decision.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "wallet": "<wallet>"
    },
    "name": "check_wallet_trust"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
walletYesEVM wallet address (0x...)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses fail-closed semantics (error result is REFUSE), names the output fields decision and safe_to_pay, and warns that measurement is evidence rather than the decision. It omits permissions, latency, rate limits, and what the score body contains, but the core behavioral contract is clear.

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?

Short and front-loaded: purpose first, then the decision rule, then the caution about measurement. Dense but every sentence does work; the only friction is the slightly staccato phrasing around 'Decide on decision'.

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?

There is no output schema, yet the description names the key return fields and the fail-closed interpretation rule, which is exactly what an agent needs to act on the response. What the score body inside measurement looks like, and whether results are cached or chain-specific, remain unstated.

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?

There is a single wallet parameter at 100% schema coverage, so the schema already documents it fully. The description adds nothing about address format, chain scope, or what happens for unregistered wallets beyond the ERC-8004 note, so this sits at the baseline.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: a trust check for a wallet address, with the added detail that it resolves ERC-8004 agents when registered. That distinguishes it somewhat from check_agent_trust/check_payee_trust, but it never explicitly says how it differs from those siblings, so the differentiation is inferential rather than stated.

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?

The description gives strong guidance on how to act on the result (pay only on ALLOW_PAY, treat errors as REFUSE), which is genuinely useful. It gives no guidance on when to call this tool rather than check_agent_trust, check_payee_trust, or pay_if_trusted, leaving routing to inference.

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