Lightweight verification lookup: whether an AgentID exists, is public, and its verification level / trustScore. Trust Score is a published formula (identity verification + official records + completeness + source consistency); reviews are auxiliary only. Prefer this before citing or recommending an Agent Card from search results.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| trusgentId | Yes | Public AgentID to verify |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Input schema / properties / trusgentId / descriptionPrevious value: -"Public Agent ID to verify"New value: +"Public AgentID to verify"Input schema / properties / trusgentId / descriptionAdded value: +"Public Agent ID to verify"Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already establish read-only/idempotent behavior, so the bar is lower. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations by explaining the trustScore is a published formula and that reviews are auxiliary only, which helps the agent interpret results correctly.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences with no filler: the first sentence front-loads the lookup purpose and output fields, and the second provides actionable usage guidance. Every clause earns its place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a one-parameter, read-only, idempotent lookup with rich annotations, this description is complete. It defines what the tool checks, what trustScore means, and when to prefer it. No output schema is required for this level of complexity.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The single parameter trusgentId is fully described in the schema as 'Public AgentID to verify,' so the description adds no additional format or constraint information. Schema coverage is 100%, making the baseline 3 appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states a specific operation ('Lightweight verification lookup') witha concrete resource (AgentID) and the exact facts returned (existence, public status, verification level/trustScore). This clearlydifferentiates it from sibling retrieval and search tools such as get_agent and search_agents.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description gives an explicit usage rule: 'Prefer this before citing or recommending an Agent Card from search results.' This tells the agent when to call it, but it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools are clearly distinct: search, verify, get full profile, get official registry, get merged profile, and get business facade each have a specific role. The only borderline overlap is between get_registry and get_merged_profile, but the descriptions explicitly position one as the preferred enriched read, reducing confusion.
All tool names follow a clean verb_noun snake_case pattern with get_, search_, and verify_ as the leading verbs. There are no mixed naming conventions or vague verbs, making the set highly predictable.
Seven tools is well-scoped for a trust/registry lookup service. Each tool serves a clear step in the discovery-to-verification flow without redundancy or unnecessary bloat.
The surface covers the main lifecycle: search registry, search agents, verify existence, fetch agent details, fetch business facade, fetch raw registry, and fetch a merged profile. A minor gap is the lack of dedicated provenance-specific endpoints beyond get_registry, but this is largely addressable via existing tools.