Skip to main content
Glama

Get Started with ~alter

get_started
Read-onlyIdempotent

Start here, and act on it without leaving this session. Self-registration is free and needs no key. You need no ~alter key and no human account: register_autonomous_challenge then register_autonomous mint you an owner-less ~handle in two calls, free-tier queries are live the moment it returns, and that handle is earn-eligible at mint, so paid reads against it settle to the handle. This call also returns what ~alter is (identity infrastructure; your ~Alter is your owned identity record, not an agent that acts for you), the tools which work without a key, an honest note that most depth is paid per query in USDC over x402 with prices read live, and the consent path that gates deep third-party data. Free L0, no authentication required.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, and the description adds useful behavioral context: no authentication required, free L0 access, live pricing via USDC over x402, and the consent path for deep data. It goes beyond the structured annotations without contradicting them.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The content is largely relevant, and 'Start here' is a strong front-loaded signal. However, the third sentence is a dense run-on that packs multiple concepts — identity infrastructure, keyless tools, x402 payment, and consent — into one long parenthetical-heavy clause, which could be clearer with structured bullets.

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?

For a zero-parameter onboarding call with no output schema, the description covers the essentials: prerequisites, what is returned, cost/free-tier status, and next actions. It does not describe the exact return format, but the absence of an output schema makes the prose-level explanation especially valuable and arguably sufficient.

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 tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so there is nothing for the description to explain about inputs. It reinforces the no-auth, free-tier behavior, which is the only relevant parameter-like context for invocation.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with 'Start here,' establishing this as the onboarding entry point, and explains what the call returns: what ~alter is, which tools work without a key, payment context, and the consent path. This differentiates it from siblings like register_autonomous or hello_agent, though the purpose is somewhat implied rather than stated with a crisp verb+resource phrase like 'Returns an onboarding overview.'

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 explicitly directs the agent to 'Start here' and gives actionable next steps: register_autonomous_challenge then register_autonomous, with no key or human account needed. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions among the sibling tools, but the 'tools which work without a key' mention helps the agent infer scope.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Several tools overlap in purpose: hello_agent and alter_login_status both report authentication state at session start, alter_verify and alter_resolve_handle both confirm handle existence, and golden_thread_status and thread_census both describe the same program. The descriptions are strong enough to disambiguate most cases, but the boundaries are not always obvious.

Naming Consistency3/5

Everything uses snake_case and most names are readable, but conventions are mixed: some tools use the alter_ prefix, others use describe_, get_, register_, or standalone nouns like thread_census and golden_thread_status. recommend_tool is also explicitly misleading, since it returns connection wiring rather than a tool recommendation.

Tool Count4/5

At 16 tools, the set is just above the typical well-scoped range, but each tool serves a distinct free-tier need: onboarding, registration, handle lookup, vocabulary reference, network stats, and program status. The count feels reasonable rather than bloated.

Completeness3/5

The set covers the anonymous/free surface well: registration, handle resolution, credential introspection, vocabularies, and program status are all present. However, multiple tools referenced in descriptions are absent, including alter_presence_set, verify_identity, query_field, and create_requirement, so core identity workflows around updating presence and performing paid field queries hit dead ends.

Resources