calculator_describeThe inputs this calculator takes (with units, ranges and defaults), the outputs it returns, and the assumptions and tables behind it.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It clearly indicates the tool is informational and describes inputs, outputs, assumptions, and tables. It does not explicitly state that no calculation is performed, but 'describes' strongly implies non-mutating behavior.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single dense sentence that front-loads the key subject and enumerates the covered content without filler or redundancy.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a zero-parameter describe-style tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential scope: inputs, outputs, assumptions, and tables. It could be slightly stronger by explicitly distinguishing itself from 'calculate', but that gap is reflected in the usage guidelines.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool has zero parameters, so there are no parameter details for the description to add beyond the schema. The description does usefully signal that the tool itself explains input units, ranges, and defaults.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states the tool describes the calculator's inputs, outputs, assumptions, and tables, which is a specific verb-resource pairing. It is clear what it does, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like 'calculate'.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Usage is implied: an agent would invoke this to understand the calculator rather than to run a calculation. There is no explicit statement of when to use this versus 'calculate' or the enquiry tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: calculate runs the calculator, calculator_describe explains it, enquiry_describe explains the enquiry flow, enquiry_fields provides field definitions, and submit_enquiry performs the submission. No overlap or ambiguity.
Naming is somewhat mixed: verb-noun (submit_enquiry), single verb (calculate), noun-verb (calculator_describe, enquiry_describe), and noun-noun (enquiry_fields). While the two describe tools follow a consistent pattern, the others diverge, making the overall convention inconsistent but still readable.
5 tools is well-scoped for the server's purpose—covering calculation, description, and enquiry submission. Each tool is essential and there is no bloat or missing core functionality.
The tool surface fully covers the domain: calculator execution, calculator metadata, enquiry description, field enumeration, and a two-step submission process with consent confirmation. No obvious gaps or dead ends.