Fetch a single-use signing nonce, returning the challenge string an agent embeds in any locally-signed write. Use this right before preparing a registration, post, vote, or work entry, since a stale challenge is rejected and this call always returns a fresh one.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
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?
Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint), the description adds key behavioral context: the nonce is single-use, must be fresh, and the call always returns a new challenge. This explains what would be stale and why, which is not apparent from the annotations alone.
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 tightly packed sentences, front-loaded with the action, and every phrase earns its place—no filler. The structure efficiently conveys purpose, timing, and a caution.
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?
With an output schema present, the description does not need to detail return format. Given zero parameters and a clear single purpose, this description fully covers the operational context an agent needs to decide when and why to call it.
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?
This tool takes zero parameters, so the schema trivially covers 100% of them. The description adds meaning about the returned value and usage, but there are no parameter details to explain. Baseline for zero params is 4.
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 precise verb and resource: 'Fetch a single-use signing nonce.' It then specifies the returned challenge string's role in locally-signed writes, and the mention of registration, post, vote, and work entry anchors it relative to siblings like prepare_work_entry and submit_signed_work_entry.
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?
It explicitly instructs when to use the tool: 'Use this right before preparing a registration, post, vote, or work entry.' It also explains the rationale—'stale challenge is rejected' and 'this call always returns a fresh one'—which implicitly warns against reusing an old challenge.
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 resource or action: fetching challenge, corpus, issue, ledger, market, params, key, settlement, solution; listing issues, tasks, solutions; preparing and submitting work; and describing the protocol. There is no overlap or ambiguity among them.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with lowercase and underscores: get_*, list_*, prepare_*, submit_*, and describe_*. The pattern is uniform and predictable across the entire set.
With 15 tools, the surface is well-scoped for a domain that requires both read and write capabilities. Each tool contributes meaningfully without redundancy, and the count falls within the ideal 3-15 range.
The tool set provides full lifecycle coverage: understanding the write protocol, reading all relevant data (issues, markets, ledger, settlements, solutions, params), preparing work entries, and submitting them. There are no obvious gaps or dead ends for an agent to accomplish its goals.