The Cure Protocol

describe_tool

Read-only

READ ONE TOOL IN FULL: description, JSON input schema, whether it writes, its HTTP endpoint and a worked example input you can adapt. NEXT: call the tool directly, or through execute_tool in compact mode.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes	MCP tool name, for example submit_results_gap.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	No	The answer. Shape depends on the tool; describe_tool documents it.
`_meta`	No	source, generatedAt, sources (per-source lastSyncedAt and ageHours), rateLimit, disclaimer.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 28, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": {},
+  "properties": {
+    "_meta": {
+      "additionalProperties": {},
+      "description": "source, generatedAt, sources (per-source lastSyncedAt and ageHours), rateLimit, disclaimer.",
+      "propertyNames": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "data": {
+      "description": "The answer. Shape depends on the tool; describe_tool documents it."
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedOct 24, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / name / maxLength
```
Added value: +20000
```
AddedOct 19, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds meaningful context about what this read returns, notably that it reports 'whether it writes' for the target tool and supplies a 'worked example input you can adapt' — details beyond the structured annotations. It stops short of describing pagination, size limits, or error behavior for unknown tool names.

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?

Two sentences, each earning its place. The core payload (what is returned) is front-loaded in a colon-delimited list, and the follow-up workflow hint is compact. No filler or redundant restatement of the title.

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 single-parameter, read-only introspection tool with a full schema, complete annotations, and an output schema, the description covers purpose, return contents, and next-step usage. Nothing essential for correct invocation 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%: the single 'name' parameter is documented with an example ('submit_results_gap'). The description adds no additional parameter guidance (e.g., what happens with an invalid or ambiguous tool name), so the schema carries the full burden. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb-and-resource framing ('READ ONE TOOL IN FULL') and enumerates exactly what comes back: description, JSON input schema, write behavior, HTTP endpoint, and a worked example input. This is distinct from sibling tools like find_tools or list_capabilities, which search or enumerate rather than fully expand a single tool.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The 'NEXT: call the tool directly, or through execute_tool in compact mode' line gives a useful workflow hint after inspection, implying this is a pre-call step. However, it never explicitly contrasts with find_tools (discovery) or list_capabilities (catalog listing), so the agent must infer when to choose this over those siblings.

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

All The Cure Protocol tools Inspect

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

Need Help?