Skip to main content
Glama
tersignhq

tersign

Official
by tersignhq
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersScoreDiscussions(2)Admin
TypeScript
Remote

Record counter-signed disclosure

record_disclosure

Create verifiable EU AI Act disclosure evidence by locally digesting disclosure text, signing an action record, and receiving a counter-signature on a public ledger. No API key required.

Instructions

One-call disclosure evidence (EU AI Act Art 50 dialect): digests the disclosure text LOCALLY, signs an action record with your key, and the public ledger counter-signs it into your per-signer hash chain. No API key needed — first call self-provisions a free signer-keyed account.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindNowhat was disclosed: 'ai-interaction' = the user was told they are talking to an AI; 'synthetic-content' = output was marked machine-generated. Defaults to 'ai-interaction'
textNothe disclosure text as presented — digested locally, never transmitted
mediumNochannel: 'chat' | 'api' | 'voice' | 'ui' …
agentIdYesstable identifier for the disclosing agent — keep it constant across calls so one chain accumulates per agent
textDigestNopre-computed digest (wins over text)
resourceUrlNoabsolute URL of the surface the disclosure was presented on, when there is one

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.4.7
    • changedInput schema / properties / agentId / description
      Previous value: -"stable identifier for the disclosing agent"New value: +"stable identifier for the disclosing agent — keep it constant across calls so one chain accumulates per agent"
    • addedInput schema / properties / kind / description
      Added value: +"what was disclosed: 'ai-interaction' = the user was told they are talking to an AI; 'synthetic-content' = output was marked machine-generated. Defaults to 'ai-interaction'"
    • addedInput schema / properties / resourceUrl / description
      Added value: +"absolute URL of the surface the disclosure was presented on, when there is one"
  2. First observedv0.2.0

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 burden and does well: it discloses local digesting, signing with the caller's key, public-ledger counter-signing, per-signer hash chains, and free self-provisioning. It does not explicitly state irreversibility or post-record behavior, but the public-ledger and hash-chain wording makes the durable write intent clear.

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 sentences with no filler: the first states purpose and mechanism, the second adds the key onboarding fact. Important details such as local processing and no API key are front-loaded.

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?

Given six parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description plus schema cover the workflow, onboarding, and key parameter semantics. The main gap is an explicit return/result description, though the schema's chainId note partially covers what the first call produces.

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?

The schema already documents most parameters, so the baseline is 3; the description adds useful cross-cutting meaning by mapping 'digests the disclosure text LOCALLY' to text/textDigest, 'signs an action record with your key' to signingKey, and 'per-signer hash chain' to agentId/chainId. It does not enumerate every parameter, but the schema fills those details.

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 names a concrete action and resource: recording one-call disclosure evidence under the EU AI Act Art 50, with a clear mechanism (local digest, signing, public-ledger counter-signing). This is distinct from sibling tools like record_refund and verify_compliance_record, so an agent can identify the tool's purpose without ambiguity.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It provides a clear when-to-use context: when EU AI Act Art 50 disclosure evidence is needed, and it stresses a one-call, no-API-key flow. It does not explicitly enumerate when not to use it or name sibling alternatives, but the regulatory use case is specific enough to route the agent.

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