Aevia

Load workflow guide

load_skill

Read-onlyIdempotent

How this Aevia connection works, plus playbooks for results, reports, systems. Returns a skill's playbook as the result; takes no action itself. A playbook is step-by-step guidance for a multi-step job, too long for a description. connector_guide covers how this connection works: workspaces, refs, finding data, the library, building, calculating and failures. assessment_interpretation covers reading and comparing results: what an indicator result is and is not, a figure's anchors, functional-unit equivalence and comparison discipline. report_writing covers writing results up as a document, from a screening note to an ISO 14044 study. product_system_authoring covers building a new product system with lca_compose_assembly / lca_compose_linked: build order, which of the two fits, failure modes, and tagging life-cycle phases. A loaded playbook stays in context; one load per session suffices. Skills are gated on what the token can call; an unavailable request returns the available list.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "skill_id": "<skill_id>"
    },
    "name": "load_skill"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`skill_id`	Yes	Id of the skill to load, e.g. `product_system_authoring`. An unknown or ungated id returns the list of skills available to this session.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 27, 2026

changedInput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```

First observedSep 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds real context beyond them: the playbook persists in context so repeated loads are wasteful, and skills are gated on token permissions with an unavailable id returning the available list rather than failing. That is exactly the kind of auth and context-cost behavior annotations cannot express.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Purpose and the no-side-effects caveat are front-loaded, and every sentence carries routing or behavioral information. However, all four skill summaries are packed into one dense paragraph, making the description harder to scan than a short list would be, even though little could be deleted without losing value.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With one required parameter, full schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is complete: it says what comes back (a playbook as the result), that nothing is mutated, when to load it, and what happens on a bad or ungated id. Nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly is missing.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% and the schema already explains that unknown ids return the available list, so the baseline would be 3. The description earns more by enumerating the actual value domain and summarizing the content behind each id — semantics an agent cannot derive from a single `product_system_authoring` example in the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource — "Returns a skill's playbook as the result" — and immediately bounds the scope with "takes no action itself." It also defines what a playbook is ("step-by-step guidance for a multi-step job, too long for a description"), which distinguishes this fetch-a-guide tool from data-fetching siblings like knowledge_get_full_document or engine_get.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It explicitly routes among all four accepted values, saying what each covers (connector_guide = connection mechanics, assessment_interpretation = reading/comparing results, report_writing = documentation, product_system_authoring = build order with the two compose tools). It also gives load-frequency guidance ("one load per session suffices") and the exclusion that it "takes no action itself," so an agent knows not to expect side effects.

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

All Aevia tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?