Skip to main content
Glama

tor_check_anonymity

Read-onlyIdempotent

Verifies Tor anonymity by checking traffic routes through Tor and comparing exit IP with direct IP to confirm anonymity before sensitive requests.

Instructions

Check if Tor is active and verify anonymity.

Contacts check.torproject.org to verify traffic routes through Tor, then compares the Tor exit IP with the direct (real) IP to confirm anonymity. Use this before making sensitive requests.

Args: params (TorStatusInput): Validated input containing: - response_format (ResponseFormat): 'json' or 'markdown'

Returns: str: Anonymity verification result.

JSON schema:
{
    "tor_exit_ip": str | null,
    "is_tor_verified": bool,
    "direct_ip": str,
    "ips_differ": bool | null,
    "anonymous": bool
}

Examples: - Use when: "Am I anonymous right now?" -> default params - Use when: "Verify Tor is working before OSINT" -> default params - Don't use when: You want to fetch a URL (use tor_private_fetch) - Don't use when: You want full connection details (use tor_privacy_status)

Error Handling: - Tor not running: Returns error with install instructions - Network issues: Returns partial result with error field

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
paramsYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows the tool is safe and idempotent. The description adds valuable behavioral context: it contacts check.torproject.org, compares Tor exit IP with direct IP, and describes error handling (e.g., Tor not running returns install instructions). This goes beyond what annotations provide.

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?

The description is well-structured with clear sections (purpose, args, returns, examples, error handling). It is front-loaded with the main purpose. While slightly verbose due to examples and error handling, every section is relevant and adds value.

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 tool's moderate complexity (checking anonymity involves multiple steps), the description is comprehensive. It explains the process, output schema, error cases, and provides usage examples. The presence of an output schema further enriches completeness. For a tool with one parameter, this is fully adequate.

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?

Although schema description coverage is 0%, the description details the single parameter (params: TorStatusInput) and its subfield response_format, including the enum values ('json' or 'markdown') and default. It also explains the output schema. This adds substantial meaning beyond the input schema alone.

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 states the tool's purpose: 'Check if Tor is active and verify anonymity.' It uses specific verbs (check, verify) and a clear resource (Tor anonymity). The description also distinguishes from sibling tools by explicitly stating when not to use it, such as for fetching URLs (use tor_private_fetch) or full connection details (use tor_privacy_status).

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 guidance on when to use the tool (e.g., 'before making sensitive requests', questions like 'Am I anonymous right now?') and when not to use it (e.g., 'Don't use when: You want to fetch a URL'). It also names alternative tools (tor_private_fetch, tor_privacy_status), making differentiation easy.

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/rushikeshmore/tor-mcp'

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