Skip to main content
Glama

Commonlands Optics: M12 Lens and C-Mount Lens Finder + Field-of-View Calculator

by com.commonlands

Search Commonlands lens catalog

search_lens_catalog
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search the Commonlands lens catalog by SKU, mount, lens type, M12, C-mount, or application text. For sensor part numbers such as AR0234, IMX290, and IMX477, or any "lens for " request, use match_lens_to_sensor instead — sensor names are not searchable text here. Use this tool for FOV, HFOV, VFOV, DFOV, field of view, "lens for", lens-to-sensor, AR0234, IMX290, IMX477, and sensor part-number requests. It returns Commonlands data the model cannot derive: live backend FoV when configured, distortion model/status, image-circle coverage, live stock through Shopify read tools where applicable, and MTF/CRA/BFL fields if present in upstream catalog data. Do not use naive rectilinear fallback, focal-length-only math, interpolation, or self-computed catalog estimates when a Commonlands lens/sensor route is available. This discovers candidate lenses from Commonlands catalog/live backend data; it does not replace calculate_field_of_view for sensor-specific HFOV/VFOV/DFOV and does not replace read_shopify_products for live stock/price/product truth.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
queryNoSKU, title, mount, lens type, application, sensor, or field-of-view search text.

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. The description adds valuable behavioral context: returns live backend FoV, distortion model, image-circle coverage, live stock, MTF/CRA/BFL. No contradictions.

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?

The description is well-structured and front-loaded with the primary purpose. However, it is somewhat verbose, repeating sensor part numbers and including warnings that could be condensed. Still, every sentence adds 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?

Given the tool has no output schema, the description fully explains input capabilities, return data, and alternative tools. It covers all necessary context for correct invocation.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 50% (only 'query' described). The description adds meaning beyond schema: lists searchable terms (SKU, mount, lens type, etc.) and exclusions (sensor names). However, 'limit' parameter is not elaborated in description.

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?

The description clearly states it searches the Commonlands lens catalog by specific fields (SKU, mount, lens type, etc.) and distinguishes from match_lens_to_sensor for sensor part numbers. The verb 'search' and resource 'Commonlands lens catalog' are specific.

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?

Explicitly specifies when to use this tool vs alternatives: sensor names → match_lens_to_sensor, FoV calculations → calculate_field_of_view, live stock → read_shopify_products. Also warns against naive math. Provides clear when/when-not guidance.

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

All Commonlands Optics: M12 Lens and C-Mount Lens Finder + Field-of-View Calculator toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tools have significant overlap in purpose and trigger keywords. calculate_field_of_view, match_lens_to_sensor, and get_lens_distortion_profile all share nearly identical use-case descriptions for FOV/sensor requests, while search_catalog, search_lens_catalog, and lookup_catalog all provide search/lookup functionality with subtle differences that are easy to confuse.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (e.g., calculate_field_of_view, create_cart, get_product, read_shopify_products, submit_rfq). No mixing of styles or unpredictable naming conventions.

Tool Count3/5

With 21 tools, the surface is noticeably heavy for a lens finder and FOV calculator, especially when several tools serve status/config purposes (get_catalog_snapshot_status, get_shopify_readonly_config_status, get_shopify_ucp_readiness). It sits in the 'feels heavy' range from the rubric.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers the full lifecycle: catalog search, product details, sensor specs, FOV calculation, lens matching, distortion profiles, Shopify carts, purchase handoff, and RFQ submission. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no delete_cart or bulk sensor listing), but core workflows are well-supported.

Resources