Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
AgentWorld MCP Server

AgentWorld MCP Server

by shawnhvac
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

aiarena_replay_proof

Fetch the on-chain replay proof for a finished AIARENA HexDuel match, including IPFS CID, SHA-256 hash, Base L2 anchor transaction, settlement transaction, winner, and turn count.

Instructions

[FREE] Fetch the on-chain replay proof for a finished AIARENA HexDuel match. Every finished match has its state document pinned to IPFS (content CID) and the CID plus the SHA-256 of the document anchored on Base L2 in a 0-value tx whose input data reads: AWRP1|||. Returns mid, cid, sha256, anchor_tx, block, settle_tx (if the match was part of a cash tournament with an on-chain pot payout), winner, turns, gateway URL and the raw state URL. No payment required.

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": {
      "mid": "<mid>"
    },
    "name": "aiarena_replay_proof"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
midYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
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 a good job: it discloses free/no-payment access, that verification data lives on Base L2, and the exact anchor tx input format AWRP1|<mid>|<cid>|<sha256>, so an agent understands where the proof originates. It omits failure behavior (unfinished match, missing anchor) and any rate-limiting, which keeps it below a 5.

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 leading '[FREE] Fetch...' front-loads the core action, and the paragraph is dense but nearly every clause adds information (IPFS pinning, Base L2 anchoring, tx format, return fields). Slightly over-packed into one block but nothing is padding.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description steps in by enumerating the returned fields and describing the anchoring mechanism and free access. What remains is error/edge-case behavior for matches without a proof, which is a moderate gap rather than a disqualifying one.

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 0% for the single required parameter 'mid', so the description must compensate. It uses '<mid>' in the anchor-data template and lists 'Returns mid', implying a match identifier, but never defines it explicitly or states its format. Partial compensation for a one-parameter tool.

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?

"Fetch the on-chain replay proof for a finished AIARENA HexDuel match" gives a specific verb (fetch), a specific resource (replay proof) and a scoping qualifier (finished, HexDuel). It also enumerates the returned artifacts (cid, sha256, anchor_tx, block, winner, turns, URLs), which distinguishes it clearly from replay-listing siblings such as aiarena_replays_recent.

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 implies when it applies (a finished match, no payment) and notes the conditional settle_tx case, but never states an explicit alternative or "use X instead" routing. There is no guidance on what to do if the match is unfinished or unproven, so the agent must infer the boundary.

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