CliDeck MCP — Network Knowledge

Query Domain Knowledge

query_domain_knowledge

Idempotent

Run deterministic search in one domain using that pack’s validated context and public-record schema. Network queries may create or update a tracked research demand for missing or incomplete knowledge.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`context`	Yes
`question`	Yes
`domain_id`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`answers`	Yes
`context`	Yes
`unknown`	Yes
`coverage`	No
`learning`	No
`domain_id`	Yes
`next_action`	Yes
`answer_status`	No
`cross_platform_examples`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedSep 30, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / learning / properties / id

Added value: +{
+  "format": "uuid",
+  "pattern": "^([0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[1-8][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[89abAB][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12}|00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000|ffffffff-ffff-ffff-ffff-ffffffffffff)$",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / learning / properties / message
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
addedOutput schema / properties / learning / properties / needs_context
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```

First observedSep 30, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=true, and the description explains why a 'query' can mutate: it 'may create or update a tracked research demand for missing or incomplete knowledge.' That side-effect disclosure is real value beyond the structured hints, though it doesn't cover latency, auth, or response shape.

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?

Two tight sentences with the core action front-loaded and the notable side effect second; no filler. The second sentence's referent ('Network queries') is slightly murky, costing a point.

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

Completeness3/5

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

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be explained, and the write side effect is disclosed. However, with 4 parameters at 0% schema description coverage and a free-form nested context object, the definition leaves an agent guessing what to put in context or how limit constrains results.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% and the schema contains no per-parameter descriptions, so the description must carry the load. It only gestures at 'domain_id' (one domain) and 'context' (the pack's validated context); 'question' and 'limit' are never addressed, and the nested context object's expected keys remain opaque.

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 ('Run deterministic search in one domain') plus the mechanism ('that pack's validated context and public-record schema'). It implicitly contrasts with the network path, but never names the obvious sibling query_network_knowledge, so an agent must infer the split itself.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not, or alternative selection guidance. The phrase 'Network queries may...' gestures at a distinction but is ambiguous about whether it describes this tool's behavior or a different tool's, leaving routing to inference.

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

All CliDeck MCP — Network Knowledge 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.