calculator_describeThe inputs this calculator takes (with units, ranges and defaults), the outputs it returns, and the assumptions and tables behind it.
| 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?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It usefully states that the tool returns inputs (with units, ranges, defaults), outputs, assumptions, and tables, giving a clear expectation of content. It does not mention any side effects or limitations, but for a describe-only tool this is largely sufficient.
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?
The description is a single focused sentence that front-loads the main content areas: inputs, outputs, assumptions, and tables. Every phrase adds useful meaning with no redundancy or filler.
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 descriptive tool, the description is largely complete: it names the categories of information returned. However, it does not describe the format of the output or whether it includes examples, which would strengthen completeness given there is no output schema.
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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds meaningful context about the calculator's inputs and outputs, even though there are no parameter schemas to elaborate on.
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 clearly specifies what the tool does: it presents the calculator's inputs, outputs, assumptions, and underlying tables. This distinguishes it from siblings like 'calculate' and 'enquiry_describe' by focusing solely on explaining the calculation model rather than performing or handling enquiries.
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?
No guidance is given on when to use this tool instead of siblings such as 'calculate' or 'enquiry_describe'. The description implies it is informational, but it does not explicitly say to consult this before performing a calculation or to understand the calculator's model.
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 concern: running the calculator, describing the calculator, explaining the enquiry flow, listing enquiry fields, and submitting an enquiry. The two describe tools are clearly separated by domain prefix, so an agent should not confuse them.
The names are readable and grouped by area, but the convention is mixed: 'calculate' is a bare verb, 'calculator_describe' and 'enquiry_describe' use noun_describe, 'enquiry_fields' is noun_noun, and 'submit_enquiry' is verb_noun. There is no single consistent verb_noun pattern.
Five tools is well-scoped for a focused calculator-plus-enquiry server. Each tool earns its place and there is no redundant surface area.
The surface covers both core flows completely: calculating costs (including documenting inputs/defaults) and submitting an enquiry (describing the process, providing fields, and handling the two-step confirmation). No obvious dead ends or missing operations for the stated purpose.