get_studio_info
Informations sur le studio MB Mastering : fondateur, expérience, adresse à Paris, équipement analogique, liens et réseaux.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
mb-mastering
TDQS
A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, but the description lists the type of information returned (founder, experience, address, equipment, links). It does not mention read-only nature or potential limitations, but these are implied.
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?
Single sentence, front-loaded with key information, no wasted words.
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?
Given zero parameters, no output schema, and a simple purpose, the description fully and adequately specifies what the tool returns.
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?
No parameters, so the description does not need to add parameter-level details. Baseline score of 4 applies.
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 tool name and description clearly state it returns information about the MB Mastering studio. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_faq, get_pricing, get_services which serve different purposes.
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 implies when to use it (when needing studio info) versus alternatives like get_pricing or get_services, but does not explicitly state exclusions or prerequisites.
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.
TDQS
A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation4/5
Each tool serves a distinct purpose: search/fetch for content, get_* for info categories, and quote-related tools for requests/admin. Minor overlap exists between get_pricing and get_services, which both mention tariffs, but they are otherwise clearly differentiated.
Naming Consistency4/5
Most tools follow a verb_noun pattern (get_faq, get_pricing, send_quote_request, prepare_quote_email), but 'fetch' and 'search' are bare verbs that deviate from the get_* style. All names are lowercase snake_case, so consistency is mostly preserved.
Tool Count5/5
With 8 tools, the server is well-scoped for a studio information and quote integration. Each tool adds value without redundancy, and the count is within the ideal range.
Completeness5/5
The server covers all core needs: searching and retrieving content, accessing service/pricing/FAQ/studio info, requesting quotes, and preparing admin emails. No major dead ends or missing operations for the apparent domain.