Skip to main content
Glama

SaSame MCP Observatory + Gold Rush Town

by online.sasame

meter_open

Open a usage/budget meter recorded in SaSame's append-only ledger. Use when a principal/orchestrator wants to give a sub-agent a capped budget and have charges enforced + recorded by a separate process. SaSame holds NO funds and is NOT a payment processor: it timestamps and ed25519-signs the envelope with its published public key, so the accounting is offline-verifiable. Returns a meter_id + a signed receipt (verify the signature with trust_pubkey).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
memoNoOptional note
unitNoUnit label, e.g. 'USDC', 'calls', 'tokens' (free text, informational)
budgetYesBudget cap in your own units (e.g. USDC, tokens, calls). Charges beyond this are rejected.
owner_labelNoWho owns this budget (self-claimed label, unverified)

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  2. Added
  3. Removed
  4. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Discloses that SaSame holds no funds, timestamps and signs envelopes with ed25519 for offline verification, and returns a signed receipt. This adds significant context beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint false, etc.). No contradiction.

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?

Three concise sentences front-loading purpose, usage, and key behavioral details. No fluff, every sentence earns its place.

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?

Covers purpose, usage, behavior, and return value. Lacks details on receipt format or verification steps, but given schema coverage and annotations, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to use.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description does not add extra meaning to parameters beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool opens a usage/budget meter in SaSame's append-only ledger. It uses specific verb 'Open' and resource 'usage/budget meter', distinguishing it from siblings like meter_charge and meter_status.

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?

Describes when to use: 'when a principal/orchestrator wants to give a sub-agent a capped budget'. It also clarifies what it is not (payment processor). Lacks explicit exclusions or alternative tool references, but the guidance is clear.

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

All SaSame MCP Observatory + Gold Rush Town 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

B3.1/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

With 94 tools spanning overlapping concepts (multiple readiness/audit/grade tools, many status checkers, deprecated aliases like trust_* vs observation_*), agents will frequently struggle to pick the right one. While each tool is individually distinct, the sheer volume and conceptual overlap (e.g., audit_mcp, readiness_report, verify_mcp_ready, lookup_readiness, recommend_mcp, subscribe_grade_changes) create high misselection risk.

Naming Consistency3/5

Most tools use snake_case with underscores, but the pattern is inconsistent: some are verb-first (audit_mcp, verify_mcp_ready, claim_start, check_engagement) while others are noun-first (receipt_issue, meter_open, work_order_open, agent_invoice_status). Deprecated aliases like trust_compare vs observation_compare further break consistency, though the majority remain readable.

Tool Count1/5

94 tools is far beyond any reasonable scope for a single server, even one with broad ambitions like 'observatory + town'. The calibration notes 50+ as extreme mismatch; this server far exceeds that. Many tools are highly specific (e.g., factory_resolve_dead_letter, visit_touch_status, start_here) and could be consolidated or split into separate servers.

Completeness3/5

The server covers a wide range of domains (auditing, claiming, receipts, meters, escrow, work orders, gold rush, town, analytics) and offers many CRUD-like operations, but several lifecycle gaps exist: no cancel/close for work orders (only open/accept/deliver/accept_delivery), escrow (only open/attest/status), or meters (only open/charge/status). Given the massive scope, important operations are missing, though core workflows are present.

Resources