Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

QuanterLab

by com.quanterlab
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

card_slider

Read-onlyIdempotent

For a ready test's result card only, which calls it when its slider moves to a stop: the same test on the same stock and years with the test's one setting at that stop. A stop already run, by anyone, answers at once with its card (its words, figures and chart); a new one runs, and the card asks again until it answers. It uses none of the day's runs; an account makes at most 40 new slider results a day.

    Args:
        task_id: The task_id of the ready test the card shows.
        value: The stop the slider moved to.
        run: The id of that stop's run as the last answer gave it, sent back while it goes on.

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": {
      "task_id": "<task_id>",
      "value": "<value>"
    },
    "name": "card_slider"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
runNo
valueYes
task_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses genuinely useful behavior: cached results are returned instantly for any stop already run by anyone, new stops are computed, and the caller must poll by sending `run` back until it answers. It also gives a concrete quota (40 new slider results per account per day), which is exactly the kind of constraint annotations cannot carry. It stops short of saying what happens when the quota is exhausted or how long a new run typically takes.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The Args block is clean and useful, but the prose is wordy and circuitous ('the card asks again until it answers'), and the leading sentence is the least parseable part rather than the most important. The rate-limit fact is a strong closer, but several clauses could be tightened without loss.

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 no output schema, the description does sketch the return value ('its card (its words, figures and chart)') and explains the polling contract and quota, which covers most of what an agent needs to call this correctly. Missing are failure modes, such as quota-exceeded behavior and how to know a run has failed versus still running.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the load, and it does define all three parameters, including the non-obvious lifecycle of `run` ('the id of that stop's run as the last answer gave it, sent back while it goes on'). The weakness is `value`: it is only 'the stop the slider moved to', with no range, step, or units, which matters for a slider input.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The core action is buried in an indirect construction ('For a ready test's result card only, which calls it when its slider moves to a stop'), but a careful reader can extract the verb+resource: return the result card for a given test at a given slider stop, from cache or by running it. The scoping phrase 'For a ready test's result card only' does separate it from siblings like show_report_card, though only obliquely.

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?

It implies the trigger condition (slider moved to a stop on a ready test's result card) and adds a usage-relevant fact ('It uses none of the day's runs'), but it never names alternatives such as show_report_card or run_card_progress, nor does it state when not to call it. An agent must infer routing from context.

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

All QuanterLab 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