Skip to main content
Glama

Egyptian Sum

egyptian_sum
Read-onlyIdempotent

The sum of the denominators in the greedy Egyptian expansion of a/b. 3/7 sums to 245, 5/6 sums to 5, and 8/11 sums to 4114. The fraction must be proper. a and b run from 1 to 30, with b at least 2. Price: $0.001 USDC per successful call (x402, Solana). Same tool over HTTPS: POST https://scorptech.it.com/api/x402/v1/egyptian-sum

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": {
      "a": "<a>",
      "b": "<b>"
    },
    "name": "egyptian_sum"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
aYes
bYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish that this is a safe, idempotent read-only computation. The description adds materially useful behavioral context: the exact price per successful call, the x402/Solana payment context, and an equivalent HTTPS endpoint.

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 front-loaded with the core definition, followed by useful examples, constraints, and payment/access details. It is slightly dense but every part adds value for an agent invoking a paid mathematical computation.

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?

For a two-parameter mathematical tool with no output schema, the description supplies enough context to call it correctly: inputs are bounded, the proper-fraction requirement is explicit, examples demonstrate the integer output, and payment/access details are included.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates well by identifying a/b as a fraction and adding the critical 'proper fraction' constraint, which is not encoded in the schema. It also restates the numeric ranges, though those are already present in the schema.

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 clearly states the computation: the sum of denominators in the greedy Egyptian expansion of a/b, reinforced by worked examples. It does not, however, explicitly distinguish this tool from nearby siblings such as egyptian, egyptian_first, egyptian_last, or egyptian_length.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It gives domain constraints ('fraction must be proper', 'a and b run from 1 to 30, with b at least 2') and examples that imply valid use, but it never states when to choose this tool over the many related Egyptian-fraction siblings. Usage is therefore inferable but not guided.

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.

Resources