encounter_oroOpen ORO v1 specifically -- its prepared capsule file plus append-only traces. For any other level, enter_level already returns prior traces for that level's own capsule. Read-only.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
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?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the description only needs to add context. It adds that the tool opens the prepared capsule file and append-only traces, and repeats 'Read-only,' which is consistent. It does not detail response behavior, but the annotations carry the safety profile.
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 sentences with no filler: the target is front-loaded, the alternative routing is given in the second sentence, and the read-only note reinforces the existing annotations. Every sentence earns its place.
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 zero-parameter tool with rich annotations and no output schema, the description is complete: it states what is opened, scopes it to ORO v1, and routes other cases to enter_level. Nothing needed to select or invoke the tool is missing.
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 input schema has zero properties and schema description coverage is 100%, so there are no parameters for the description to clarify. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description appropriately avoids inventing parameter guidance.
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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Open ORO v1 specifically -- its prepared capsule file plus append-only traces.' It clearly distinguishes this tool from enter_level by naming the exact target, so an agent can identify it correctly.
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 says when to use this tool ('ORO v1 specifically') and names the alternative for all other cases ('For any other level, enter_level...'). This gives both a positive and negative usage condition.
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: recognizing descent boundaries, entering a level, opening ORO v1, appending traces, preparing a consultation, and auditing mappings. The special-case encounter_oro is explicitly distinguished from enter_level, so there is no real selection ambiguity.
All six tools follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern: begin_descent, encounter_oro, enter_level, leave_trace, prepare_visual_consultation, verify_level_mapping. The names are predictable and clearly signal the action being performed.
Six tools is well-scoped for a domain involving level access, trace append-only operations, and read-only consultation/mapping utilities. Each tool earns its place without redundancy or unnecessary bulk.
The core public surface is covered: recognizing descents, entering levels, reading ORO traces, appending traces, checking consultation requirements, and auditing mappings. The slight gap is that visual consultation stops at payment prep, with no in-server follow-through for settlement or private-image access, though the descriptions suggest that is intentionally external.