Skip to main content
Glama
nohosa001-pixel

security-gate-x402

by nohosa001-pixel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

quote_agent_insurance

Calculate actuarial premiums and issue signed EIP-712 policy quotes for autonomous AI agent liability insurance covering prompt injection, hallucination damage, and smart contract errors.

Instructions

Calculates actuarial underwriting premium and issues a cryptographically signed EIP-712 PolicyQuote for autonomous AI agent malpractice, prompt injection, and operational liability insurance. Use this tool ONLY when an AI agent or its operator seeks liability/malpractice coverage against prompt injection losses, hallucination damage, or smart contract execution errors. Do NOT use this tool for evaluating general loan capacity; use get_agent_loan_quote instead. Do NOT use this tool for off-chain text auditing; use inspect_agent_output instead.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
agent_addressYesChecksummed EVM wallet address (0x...) of the autonomous AI agent seeking insurance coverage.0x70997970C51812dc3A010C7d01b50e0d17dc79C8
duration_daysNoPolicy validity period in days (e.g. 7, 30, 90).
beneficiary_addressNoEVM address of the client or treasury beneficiary entitled to receive insurance indemnity upon adjudicated loss.0x3C44CdDdB6a900fa2b585dd299e03d12FA4293BC
coverage_amount_usdcNoTotal requested USDC coverage limit in case of agent malpractice or failure.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.0.6

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses that the tool produces a cryptographically signed EIP-712 PolicyQuote and describes the scope of coverage. However, it does not state whether issuing the quote has side effects, requires payment, or has any prerequisites.

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?

Every sentence earns its place: the first states the core action, the second gives precise when-to-use context, and the last two warn against misuse with explicit sibling alternatives. It is thorough without being bloated.

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?

The tool has no output schema, but the description names the output artifact (a signed EIP-712 PolicyQuote), fully documents all parameters via the schema, and resolves sibling ambiguity. It is slightly light on what the caller should do with the returned quote, but it is complete enough for correct invocation.

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 description coverage is 100%, and every parameter is already well documented with defaults and examples. The description adds contextual framing for the tool overall but does not need to add parameter-level detail, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly specifies the verb ('Calculates... premium and issues... PolicyQuote'), the resource (actuarial underwriting for AI agent liability insurance), and the exact covered risks. It also distinguishes the tool from siblings by explicitly naming what it is not for.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description provides explicit when-to-use guidance ('Use this tool ONLY when...') and explicit exclusions with named alternatives (`get_agent_loan_quote`, `inspect_agent_output`). This leaves no ambiguity about tool selection.

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