Skip to main content
Glama

Truth Table Generator

TruthTableGenerator
Read-only

Truth Table Generator: Truth Table Generator creates complete truth tables for boolean expressions with support for AND, OR, NOT, XOR, NAND, and NOR operators. (Cost: 1 credit)

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": {
      "expression": "<expression>"
    },
    "name": "TruthTableGenerator"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
expressionYesBoolean expression using A-Z variables and operators (AND, OR, NOT, XOR, NAND, NOR)

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNo
errorNoError message, null on success
statusNo"ok" on success

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false) and openness, and an output schema exists, so return values need not be described. The description adds one genuinely useful behavioral fact not in structured data: the call costs 1 credit. It says nothing about expression size limits, syntax errors, or row counts for large variable sets.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

One sentence plus a cost note, so it is short, but it opens by restating the title twice ('Truth Table Generator: Truth Table Generator creates...'), which is pure waste in the most salient position.

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?

For a single-parameter, read-only tool with a full schema, a schema example, and an output schema, the description covers purpose, supported operators, and cost. Only operator precedence and failure behavior are missing, which is acceptable at this complexity.

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 description coverage is 100% and the single parameter is fully documented with an example. The description merely repeats the operator list already present in the schema, adding no syntax rules, precedence notes, or variable-count limits.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource: 'creates complete truth tables for boolean expressions', plus the operator set it supports. Clear enough for an agent to know exactly what it produces, but it does not distinguish itself from nearby siblings such as MathCalculator or RomanNumeralMath.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of alternatives. The only routing signal is the implicit 'boolean expressions' phrasing, which the agent must infer.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.