erc8004-agent-liveness
Server Details
Checks whether an ERC-8004-registered agent is actually alive right now via a real MCP handshake
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
- Repository
- nexus-mcp-infra/erc8004-agent-liveness
- GitHub Stars
- 0
- Server Listing
- erc8004-agent-liveness
Available Tools
1 toolverify_registered_agentAInspect
Checks whether an agent registered in the real ERC-8004 Identity
Registry (Base mainnet -- see module docstring "Mainnet registry
corrected" for the verification trail) is actually alive right now: resolves
its on-chain registration file, then performs a real MCP initialize
handshake against whatever endpoint it declares. verdict is one of
AGENT_NOT_FOUND, REGISTRATION_FETCH_FAILED, REGISTERED_INACTIVE,
REGISTERED_NO_ENDPOINT_DECLARED, REGISTERED_LIVE, REGISTERED_UNREACHABLE.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| agent_id | Yes |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden, and it does so thoroughly. It discloses that the tool performs a real outbound MCP initialize handshake against the endpoint the agent declares, revealing network-dependent behavior. It also enumerates all six possible verdicts, giving the agent a complete picture of success, failure, and ambiguity outcomes.
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?
The description is dense but well-structured, with the core purpose front-loaded before the mechanism details. The verdict list is efficiently packed into a single sentence, and every clause adds necessary information such as registry, network, handshake, and outcomes. There is no filler or repetition.
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?
Given the single parameter, no output schema, and no sibling tools, this description is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly. It explains the verification flow, the deployment context, and all possible verdict values. The reference to the module docstring also provides an optional deeper trail without bloating the description.
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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate for the lone agent_id parameter. It connects agent_id to the agent registered in the on-chain ERC-8004 registry, making it clear what the integer identifies. It could be more explicit by stating 'agent_id' as the registry identifier, but the one-parameter context makes the meaning sufficiently recoverable.
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 opens with a specific verb ('Checks') and a clear resource: whether an agent registered in the ERC-8004 Identity Registry is alive. It then details the actual verification mechanism, including resolving the on-chain registration file and performing an MCP initialize handshake. This makes the tool's purpose unambiguous and distinct, even without sibling tools.
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 clearly conveys when to use this tool: to determine if a registered agent is currently alive rather than merely registered. It names the deployment context (Base mainnet) and points to a module docstring for the verification trail, which helps the agent understand the appropriate context. There are no explicit exclusions or alternative tool references, but with no siblings this is a minor gap.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Tool Schema Changelog
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
1 tool update
- First observed
verify_registered_agent
Frequently Asked Questions
Claiming proves that you control a remote MCP connector. It does not move, proxy, or interrupt the server.
Open the connector listing, choose Claim ownership, and sign in to Glama.
Complete one verification method:
GitHub identity — fastest for official registry listings. For a namespace such as
io.github.alice/server, link the matching GitHub user, then choose Claim with GitHub. An organization namespace such asio.github.acme/serveralso needs that organization to have installed the Glama AI GitHub App and approved its permissions, because GitHub discloses organization membership only to apps it has installed. Use HTTP or DNS when it has not.HTTP challenge — works when you can deploy a public file. Generate a token, publish the exact JSON Glama shows at
/.well-known/glama.jsonon the same origin as the connector, then choose Check HTTP challenge.DNS challenge — works when you control DNS but cannot change the server. Generate a token, create the exact TXT record Glama shows, wait for it to propagate, then choose Check DNS challenge.
After verification, Glama sends a confirmation email and gives you access to listing details, thumbnails, health checks, and analytics. Keep the HTTP file or DNS record in place: Glama periodically checks it and ownership remains verified while the token is discoverable.
The HTTP ownership file has this structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"claim": "glama_claim_..."
}Claim tokens are opaque, stable, and bound to the signed-in Glama account. They contain no email address or other personal information. If Glama can no longer discover a verified HTTP or DNS token, it starts a seven-day grace period before removing claim-based access. Restore the same token during that period to keep ownership verified. Never publish an email address, Glama session token, GitHub token, or connector credential as ownership proof.
If verification fails, confirm that you copied the current token exactly. The HTTP file must be public, return valid JSON with a successful HTTP response, and stay on the connector's origin. DNS changes may need more time to propagate. A claim cannot transfer to a different origin or hostname: if the connector target changes, Glama starts the grace period and the new target must be claimed separately after the previous claim is released.
For a connector linked to the official MCP Registry, registry updates continue to replace its name, description, and URL by default. After claiming, open Manage connector and enable Use Glama listing details as the source of truth if edits made on Glama should be preserved. Categories and thumbnails are always managed on Glama; registry linkage and technical connection settings continue to sync.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
To improve your MCP server's ranking:
Claim ownership of the server listing
Complete the server profile with an accurate description and thumbnail
Provide a test profile so Glama can connect to and evaluate the server
Keep tool definitions clear and complete to earn a high Tool Definition Quality Score (TDQS)
Route real usage through the Glama Gateway; more recorded successful server uses also improve the ranking
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!
Related MCP Connectors
The MCP-native bridge to ERC-8004 (on-chain agent identity/reputation/validation): resolve registrat
On-chain ERC-8004 agent registry. Search, register, and check reputation across 16 chains.
Verify an agent's advertised route, price, payment details, and schemas against its live endpoint.
Which ERC-8004 agents on BNB Chain actually answer, and what any BSC trade really costs
Related MCP Servers
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables users to verify that an AI agent is who it claims to be by combining domain verification, agent-card checks, and a live MCP handshake, with paid requests handled via x402 on Base Sepolia testnet.-
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceAn MCP server that bridges ERC-8004 agent identity, reputation, and validation registries into tool calls, enabling discovery, inspection, and verification of on-chain AI agents from any MCP client.8MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceLets you probe ERC-8004 agents on BNB Smart Chain by calling their declared MCP or A2A endpoints, checking payment requirements, reading on-chain reputation authorship, and finding agents by description.MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceAn MCP server that audits ERC-8004 agent registrations, diagnosing issues and providing fix lists.-
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusing it with another; its purpose is clearly defined and distinct.
The tool name 'verify_registered_agent' follows a clear verb_noun pattern, and as the sole tool, consistency is trivially maintained.
A single tool is perfectly scoped for the narrow domain of agent liveness verification; no redundant or unnecessary tools exist, and the operation is self-contained.
The tool covers the complete liveness-check workflow, including resolving registration, fetching the declared endpoint, and performing a handshake, with comprehensive verdicts for all possible outcomes.