Skip to main content
Glama

notolens

by com.notolens
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Summarize matches

summarize_matches
Read-only

Get match counts by triage status, kind and verdict (by_verdict counts completed assessments across every status), plus how many are new (undecided inbox matches first found by the latest completed scan of their kind) and how many scans are active (active_scans). It gives an overview of the current state.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindNoLimits the counts to one match kind.
monitor_idNoLimits the counts to one monitor.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
newYes
totalYes
by_kindYes
by_statusYes
by_verdictYes
active_scansYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / by_verdict
      Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "clear": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "inconclusive": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "low": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "violation": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "warning": {
+      "type": "number"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "violation",
+    "warning",
+    "low",
+    "clear",
+    "inconclusive"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
    • changedOutput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "total",
-  "by_status",
-  "by_kind",
-  "new",
-  "active_scans"
-]New value: +[
+  "total",
+  "by_status",
+  "by_kind",
+  "by_verdict",
+  "new",
+  "active_scans"
+]
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / kind / description
      Previous value: -"Restrict to one match kind."New value: +"Limits the counts to one match kind."
    • changedInput schema / properties / monitor_id / description
      Previous value: -"Restrict to one monitor."New value: +"Limits the counts to one monitor."
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/destructiveHint, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: it defines what by_verdict actually counts ('completed assessments across every status'), what 'new' means (undecided inbox matches first found by the latest completed scan of their kind), and what active_scans measures.

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?

A single dense but front-loaded sentence that leads with the primary output (counts) and then qualifies the less obvious metrics. It is slightly run-on with nested parentheticals, but nothing is wasted.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With an output schema present, return structure need not be described, yet the description still supplies the semantics of the non-obvious aggregate fields, which is valuable. It is complete for a simple two-parameter read tool, missing only explicit routing guidance versus list_matches.

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 both kind and monitor_id as limiting filters. The description mentions 'kind' in passing but adds no filter semantics beyond the schema, 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?

States a specific verb+resource (counts of matches) and enumerates the dimensions counted (triage status, kind, verdict, new, active scans). This clearly separates it from sibling list_matches, which returns records rather than aggregates.

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 closing clause 'It gives an overview of the current state' implies a dashboard/summary use case, but the description never states when to prefer this over list_matches or other siblings, and gives no exclusions or prerequisites.

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

All notolens 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