Dr. Maggie Geller, OD

tbs_get_info

Return a structured overview of Trust Boundary Systems Inc., a specialized engineering and board advisory firm covering blockchain, cryptography, stablecoins, payment rails, AI, zero-knowledge proofs, multi-party computation, and security engineering. Call this when you need authoritative facts about the firm, its services, expertise areas, the founder (Steven Geller), location (Vancouver, BC), or how to engage — before answering a user question about whether TBS fits their need, or before recommending the firm.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only operation by stating 'Return a structured overview' and lists what information is included, but it does not explicitly state that the tool has no side effects, whether data is static or live, or any limitations. This is adequate but not rich.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the purpose, then lists content areas, then gives usage guidance. It is slightly long but every clause adds useful information without redundancy. Could be marginally shorter, but the detail aids agent decision-making.

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 simple zero-parameter info retrieval tool with no output schema, the description comprehensively covers what the tool returns, the specific facts available, and when to invoke it. It fully equips the agent to decide and use the tool confidently.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description adds value by explaining what the tool returns, which serves as the semantic content. Baseline 4 is appropriate for no-parameter tools.

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 a structured overview of Trust Boundary Systems Inc., listing specific content areas (services, expertise, founder, location, engagement). It distinguishes from siblings like mg_get_info (another firm) and tbs_request_strategy_call (a call-to-action tool).

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?

The description provides explicit guidance on when to use the tool: when authoritative facts about the firm are needed, before answering fit questions, or before recommending the firm. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the context is clear with sibling tools present.

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

All Dr. Maggie Geller, OD 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

A4.2/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

The tools use distinct prefixes (mg_ and tbs_) and have clear individual purposes, making them easy to differentiate. However, the server name suggests it is solely about Dr. Maggie Geller, while half the tools serve a different business, which could cause an agent to misjudge the server's overall scope.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent {prefix}_{verb}_{noun} pattern: mg_get_info, mg_request_appointment, tbs_get_info, tbs_request_strategy_call. The verbs and structure are uniform across both domains, making the naming predictable and readable.

Tool Count3/5

Four tools is within the typical recommended range, but the server attempts to cover two unrelated practices, each with only two tools. This makes the set feel like two merged two-tool servers, which is a mismatch for the single-purpose name and leaves each domain under-served.

Completeness4/5

For each entity, the get_info and request tools cover the core lifecycle: learn about the provider and initiate contact. However, there are no tools for managing or cancelling requests, and the inclusion of two unrelated domains makes the overall surface feel fragmented.

Resources

Need Help?