Skip to main content
Glama

goldseam

by com.ksaworks
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Compare Program Checklists

compare_program_checklists
Read-only

Compare what a program takes at several institutions: for each IPEDS UNITID, that institution's published checklist for the program (requirement groups, items, published credit strings — the work effort) beside its published tuition and fee policy (the cost). Schedule is stated not held. Nothing is summed or computed by the service; an institution, checklist, or cost the catalogs do not hold is stated as such. Each row names its current FORM's wording source: source_url, capture_file, catalog_year and source_catalog_name are that one source's, never the record's whole span. A row whose record holds more than one form or more than one source also carries version_count, source_count, first_edition_seen and last_edition_seen, and one sentence saying so in words; a record with one form and one source carries none of them and reads exactly as it always has. The forms themselves, each with its own content and its own sources, come from the one-record get, never from a list. A record last seen in an older edition says so, because the Union keeps a record no current catalog prints.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
detailNoOptional: full (the default: every requirement group and item) or summary (per checklist its program, award, year, credits and group and item counts, with each school's College Scorecard tuition)
programYesProgram or award words to match, e.g. nursing or Bachelor of Science in Nursing
unitidsYes1 to 10 IPEDS UNITIDs, e.g. ["100663", "127060"]; answered 5 institutions per call, up to 3 checklists each
institution_offsetNoOptional: the next_institution_offset from a previous answer, for the next 5 institutions

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / detail
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional: full (the default: every requirement group and item) or summary (per checklist its program, award, year, credits and group and item counts, with each school's College Scorecard tuition)",
+  "examples": [
+    "summary"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / program / examples
      Added value: +[
+  "Welding"
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / unitids / examples
      Added value: +[
+  [
+    "225070"
+  ]
+]
  3. Added

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses rich behavior: nothing is summed or computed, missing catalog data is stated as such, schedule is stated not held, each row names its source's wording via source_url/capture_file/catalog_year/source_catalog_name, and conditional version_count/source_count fields appear only for multi-form or multi-source records. It also explains how older editions are surfaced, which is valuable context not present in annotations.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is extremely long, dense, and full of run-on sentences with repeated phrasing such as 'reads exactly as it always has' and 'because the Union keeps a record no current catalog prints.' Although it front-loads the purpose reasonably well, the remainder is over-specified for a tool description and hurts readability.

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?

With no output schema and a complex comparison behavior, the description covers the important dimensions an agent needs: source provenance, conditional return fields, missing-data handling, versioning, and pagination context. It is complete enough to call and interpret the tool correctly.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters, including detail, program, unitids, and institution_offset. The description reinforces UNITID and program matching but adds no syntax or constraints beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb 'Compare' and specific resources: a program's published checklist beside tuition and fee policy for each IPEDS UNITID. It also distinguishes itself from list-based siblings by noting the forms come from 'the one-record get, never from a list.' However, it does not explicitly contrast with nearby compare tools such as compare_my_school or compare_my_major.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description gives operational scope (1 to 10 UNITIDs, 5 institutions per call, pagination via institution_offset) but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to sibling tools. It implies multi-institution comparison but does not help the agent choose among alternatives like find_checklists, get_checklist, or compare_my_school.

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

All goldseam toolsInspect
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