JYOTINT Sealed Forecasts

get_governance

Return JYOTINT's data-handling, PROVENANCE & governance posture — the answer to 'is this source safe to read / cite / ingest?'. Chain-of-custody is foregrounded: every record is SHA-256-sealed + Bitcoin-anchored before the event and independently recomputable (the provenance the proposed GSA AI data-safeguarding rule treats as first-class). Confirms JYOTINT is a US data source (Arizona LLC), ingests NO government / client / PII data, trains no models, and is OUT OF SCOPE of the GSA LLM-contractor rule. Descriptive disclosure, not a certification. Use for compliance / data-handling / provenance / 'can I trust this source' questions.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description transparently discloses behavioral traits: chain-of-custody details, SHA-256 sealing, Bitcoin anchoring, confirmation of no government/PII data ingestion, and out of scope of GSA rule. Also notes it's descriptive, not a certification.

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?

Front-loaded with main purpose. Each sentence adds value, though slightly verbose. Could be trimmed without losing meaning.

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 tool with 0 parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does and returns. Complete enough for an agent to understand.

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?

Zero parameters and 100% schema coverage. The description adds no parameter info, but baseline is 4 since schema covers and no parameters require explanation.

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 the tool returns JYOTINT's data-handling, provenance, and governance posture, answering 'is this source safe to read/cite/ingest?'. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on trust and compliance.

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?

Explicitly states 'Use for compliance / data-handling / provenance / 'can I trust this source' questions', providing clear guidance. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use but context with siblings suffices.

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

All JYOTINT Sealed Forecasts tools Inspect

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

A3.7/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes (fetch one forecast vs. list open calls vs. search), but neural_search and search_sealed_forecasts both retrieve from the same corpus, and ask_the_record overlaps slightly with neural_search for site-copy questions. Descriptions mitigate ambiguity, but a few boundaries require careful reading.

Naming Consistency4/5

The dominant pattern is get_<noun> (get_advisory, get_map, get_luck_test), with list_open_calls, search_sealed_forecasts, ask_the_record, and neural_search as deviations. All names are lowercase snake_case and readable, but the verb prefixes are not perfectly uniform.

Tool Count5/5

With 13 tools, the server is well-scoped for a specialized sealed-forecast corpus. Each tool addresses a distinct analytical or retrieval need, and the count fits comfortably in the ideal range without feeling bloated or thin.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the full lifecycle of interacting with the corpus: search, retrieve, list, inspect stats, verify integrity, regrade, visualize, and ask questions. The append-only nature means no update/delete tools are needed, so the set is complete for its stated purpose.

Resources

Need Help?