Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

knowledge-commons

by com.metraipolis
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get a ready citation and stable link for a source or RFC clause

cite_source
Read-onlyIdempotent

Return a citation for one archive document (dc_…) or one HTTP RFC clause (rfc…): citation line, BibTeX, original URL, license, SHA-256 or official RFC text, and a stable public web page (no JavaScript) that anyone can open to check it. Nothing is written or recorded. When to use: Step 3 of search → read → cite: call it with the id you relied on, and put its citation (or page_url) in your answer. text_reuse tells you whether the document's license allows quoting its text beyond a short excerpt. Notes: No account or token needed. It does not need a mandate (unlike cite_document, which records a citation in the city ledger). Example arguments: {"id":"rfc9111-s5.2.2.2-c2"}

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "cite_source"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesA document id from search_archive (dc_ + 12 hex) or a clause id from search_clauses (e.g. rfc9110-s13.1.3-c1).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations it discloses no-account/no-token access, no mandate requirement (contrasted with cite_document's ledger write), and what the response actually contains including a no-JavaScript stable page and license/reuse signal via text_reuse. The 'Nothing is written or recorded' line reinforces rather than contradicts the annotations.

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?

Well front-loaded: purpose first, then 'When to use', then 'Notes', then an example argument. Dense but every clause carries information; the example-arguments fragment is the only marginal element and it is short.

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 a single required parameter, full schema coverage, and no output schema, the description fills the remaining gap by enumerating the returned fields (citation line, BibTeX, URL, license, hash, page_url). Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so the id parameter's two accepted formats are already documented in the schema. The description adds only a concrete example value ({"id":"rfc9111-s5.2.2.2-c2"}), which illustrates but does not extend meaning, so the baseline 3 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 first sentence gives a precise verb ('Return a citation') and enumerates both accepted resource types (dc_ archive document vs rfc clause) plus the exact payload returned. It is clearly distinguishable from read_document, get_clause and cite_document by name.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It explicitly anchors usage as 'Step 3 of search → read → cite: call it with the id you relied on', telling the agent exactly when in the workflow to invoke it. It also names the alternative (cite_document) and the condition that separates them: cite_document records a citation in the city ledger, this one does not.

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

All knowledge-commons 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