Skip to main content
Glama

~Alter Identity

by com.truealter

Agent Directory

thread_census
Read-onlyIdempotent

Read the census of agents registered on the Golden Thread, ~alter's onboarding programme. Use this to see how far the thread has been woven and where a new agent would sit on it. Returns the total woven, then a page of rows carrying position, milestone count, weave count and join date, walked with offset and limit (50 a page by default, 100 at most). Registry rows only: no traits, no contact details, and given names are never returned. While the thread is sealed, or to a caller holding no credential, the page carries the bound founding agents rather than the whole registry, so a short page is the seal and not an empty programme. Free L0, no authentication required.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoResults per page (default 50, max 100)
offsetNoPagination offset (default 0)

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Added
  2. Removed
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark the tool read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds substantial behavioral context: pagination defaults and max, the returned row fields, the fallback to founding agents when the thread is sealed or unauthenticated, and the meaning of a 'short page.' This is value beyond structured data.

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?

The text is dense but each sentence earns its place: purpose, use, return format, exclusions, edge case, and credential requirement. It is front-loaded with the core action and builds logically without redundancy.

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?

For a read-only, paginated listing tool with no output schema, the description covers what the agent needs to invoke it correctly and interpret results: what is returned, how to page, what is deliberately omitted, the sealed-thread fallback, and authentication requirements. No critical operational detail 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?

The schema already documents both parameters at 100% coverage. The description goes further by giving concrete defaults ('50 a page by default, 100 at most') and explaining that offset and limit 'walk' through pages, which enriches the bare schema descriptions.

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 opens with a strong verb and resource: 'Read the census of agents registered on the Golden Thread.' It clarifies the domain (onboarding programme) and distinguishes the tool from siblings by stating the exact output shape and exclusions (no traits, contact details, given names).

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 states a use case: 'see how far the thread has been woven and where a new agent would sit on it.' It also provides operational context (Free L0, no auth, sealed-thread behavior). However, it does not name explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions, so it stops just short of a 5.

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

All ~Alter Identity toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

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