Skip to main content
Glama
tribeunal

Tribeunal Decision-Making Platform

Official

Create deal

tribeunal_create_deal

Create an escrow deal request that sets USDC payment terms and a Tribeunal jury as dispute arbiter. It stores the request only; the payer deposits on the deal page.

Instructions

Create an escrow deal request: the terms under which a payer wallet pays a payee wallet in USDC for work delivered within deliveryDays, with a Tribeunal jury as arbiter of any dispute. It creates a request only. Nothing is paid or held until the payer opens shareUrl and deposits with their own browser wallet on the deal page; Tribeunal never holds the money, and no Tribeunal tool can fund, release, refund or dispute a deal, since each is a wallet action a party takes on that page. Send shareUrl to the payer and the payee only; url opens only for the account that created the request. Ask the parties for their wallet addresses (0x + 40 hex, not usernames) and never guess one. description is written into the hashed terms: anyone holding the link and every juror can read it, and it survives account deletion, so put no secrets or personal data in it. If no dispute is raised by the release date (deliveryDays from now), anyone can release the money to the payee. A request cannot be edited or deleted; create a new one to change anything. Refused: 503 deals_unavailable (this server does not offer deals right now: tell a human, do not retry); 429 deal_daily_limit; 422 invalid_payer, invalid_payee, payee_is_zero, same_party, invalid_amount, amount_out_of_range, invalid_description, invalid_delivery_days, invalid_panel; 403 insufficient_scope; 404 on a server with no deal endpoints. Returns {slug, url, shareUrl, termsHash, honesty}. Proves: A deal request is stored with these terms, and termsHash is the keccak-256 of the exact terms text the payer's browser re-checks before it signs. Does NOT prove: That anything is paid or held; that the payee accepted the terms; that either address belongs to the person you think; that the description is true; that a court would uphold the deal; that the network is not a test network

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
panelYes"fast_track": the first round of a dispute is decided by three AI jurors and every appeal round by people. "human": every round is decided by people. Required, no default.
payeeYesThe payee's wallet address: 0x + 40 hex, not the zero address and not the payer; a mixed-case address must carry a correct EIP-55 checksum. Nothing checks that it is the right person's wallet.
payerYesThe payer's wallet address: 0x + 40 hex, not the zero address; a mixed-case address must carry a correct EIP-55 checksum. Only this wallet can deposit, on the deal page. Ask the payer for it.
amountYesThe USDC amount as a decimal string with at most 6 decimal places, such as "150" or "99.5" (not minor units), above 0 and at most "2000". The escrow program also sets its own minimum and maximum; outside them the server refuses with amount_out_of_range.
descriptionYesWhat the payee delivers, as plain text, 10-2000 characters. It is copied into the hashed terms: anyone holding the link and every juror can read it, and it survives account deletion, so no secrets or personal data. No tabs, control or invisible characters, and no line that starts with a number and a dot such as "1." (use "-" for lists).
deliveryDaysYesWhole days from now until the release date, 2-90. Disputes can be raised only before it; after it, if none was raised, anyone can release the money to the payee. Deposits close earlier than that date; the deal page shows when.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv2.2.0

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations (readOnly=false, idempotent=false, destructive=false) cover the safety profile, and the description adds far more: no funds held, no edit or delete possible, the description is permanently hashed into the terms and readable by jurors, auto-release behavior on the delivery date, and a full refused-code table (503/429/422/403/404) with retry guidance. This is unusually rich behavioral disclosure beyond the annotations.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose and the single most important caveat (request only, nothing paid) before the operational detail. It is long, and the error-code list plus the proves/does-not-prove block are dense, but for a high-stakes escrow primitive each sentence carries real decision 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?

Despite no output schema, the description names the return shape ({slug, url, shareUrl, termsHash, honesty}) and defines what the tool proves and does not prove, plus failure modes and lifecycle constraints. Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description nonetheless adds operational meaning beyond the schema — 'never guess' a wallet address, no secrets or personal data in description because it is hashed and survives deletion, and the panel's arbitration consequence. It repeats some format details the schema already carries, which caps it below 5.

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 states a specific verb and resource — 'Create an escrow deal request' — and defines the terms precisely (payer wallet pays payee wallet in USDC for work delivered within deliveryDays, jury as arbiter). It also distinguishes itself from the rest of the family by stating that no Tribeunal tool can fund, release, refund or dispute a deal, separating it from case/tribe tools.

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?

Explicit when-to-use and when-not: it creates a request only, nothing is paid until the payer deposits on the deal page; send shareUrl to payer and payee only; the link opens only for the creating account. It names the alternatives by exclusion ('no Tribeunal tool can fund, release, refund or dispute') and tells the agent to ask parties for addresses and never guess.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.