Diamonds Expert

Сопоставить сведения о бриллиантах

knowledge_compare

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use when a person supplies characteristics of two or three diamond offers. Compare the supplied fields and identify missing information. Does not rank a winner, verify a physical stone, fetch inventory, invent prices or convert currencies. Ask which differences matter to the person.

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": {
      "options": "<options>"
    },
    "name": "knowledge_compare"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`options`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedNov 4, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / options / items / properties / values / properties / included_costs

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Дополнительные расходы",
+  "maxLength": 120,
+  "minLength": 1,
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / options / items / properties / values / properties / offer_scope

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Что входит в цену",
+  "enum": [
+    "stone",
+    "jewelry",
+    "total",
+    "unknown"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

AddedNov 1, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the description adds real value by disclosing output behavior ('identify missing information'), explicit non-goals (no winner, no stone verification, no currency conversion), and an interaction pattern ('Ask which differences matter to the person'). It still says nothing about how the comparison result is presented.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the trigger condition, followed by the negative guardrails and the interaction instruction. No filler and no repetition of schema or annotation content.

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 read-only, closed-world comparison tool with no output schema, the description covers when to call it, what it will and will not do, and what it returns at a high level. The remaining gap is the internal shape of each option, which the description never touches.

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?

Top-level schema coverage is reported at 0%, so the description has to carry the load; it does convey the 2-3 offer cardinality and that 'supplied fields' are compared. However, it never explains the label/values structure of each option or which characteristic keys are accepted, leaving the nested object undocumented in the description.

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?

The description gives a specific verb and resource ('Compare the supplied fields' of 'two or three diamond offers') and bounds the scope at 2-3 options. It does not name any sibling tool explicitly, but the exclusion list ('does not ... fetch inventory') partly distinguishes it from knowledge_search/estimate_rapaport.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

'Use when a person supplies characteristics of two or three diamond offers' states the triggering condition clearly, and the negative list rules out ranking, verification, inventory lookup, price invention, and currency conversion. What is missing is an explicit pointer to which sibling to use instead when those excluded needs arise.

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

All Diamonds Expert 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.

Resources

Need Help?