Retrieve the full profile of a specific agent by their on-chain ID. Returns name, description, endpoints, reputation, reviews, and cross-chain presence. Free endpoint.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| agentId | Yes | On-chain agent ID (token ID from the ERC-8004 registry) | |
| chainId | Yes | Chain ID where the agent is registered (e.g. 8453 for Base) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It adds 'Free endpoint' and lists return fields, but it does not disclose authentication requirements, rate limits, or error behavior. The read-only nature is implied by 'Retrieve,' but more detail would improve transparency.
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 a single, front-loaded sentence followed by a brief return list and a cost note. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy or fluff.
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 simple read tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, return contents, and cost. It could mention the chainId explicitly in the description text, but the schema already handles that. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100%, with both agentId and chainId fully described. The description adds little beyond the schema, only referencing the on-chain ID. With full schema coverage, the baseline of 3 applies.
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 clearly states 'Retrieve the full profile of a specific agent by their on-chain ID,' making the verb and resource explicit. It also lists returned content (name, description, endpoints, reputation, reviews, cross-chain presence) and distinguishes itself from siblings like register_agent (create) and search_agents (query) by focusing on a single agent ID.
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 implies usage when the agent ID is known, but it does not explicitly contrast with search_agents or state when not to use it. It provides clear context for invocation but lacks explicit alternative guidance.
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.
Each tool targets a distinct operation: retrieving a specific agent profile, registering a new agent, and searching the registry. There is no overlap in purpose, making selection unambiguous.
All tools follow the verb_noun pattern: get_agent_profile, register_agent, search_agents. The naming is uniformly descriptive and predictable.
Three tools is well-scoped for a registry that offers core create, read, and search functionality. Each tool serves a clear, non-redundant purpose.
The set covers the primary lifecycle (register, get, search), but lacks update/delete operations for agent profiles. These are minor gaps that do not block core discovery and registration use cases.
