dataset_provenanceThe source, the date it was computed, the licence and the citation for the Walkvo dataset. Read this to attribute a figure correctly.
| 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?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains what fields will be returned—source, date, licence, citation—but does not state whether this is a read-only operation, how the data is returned, or what happens if provenance is unavailable. For a simple metadata-fetch tool this is near-adequate but still leaves gaps.
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 two short sentences with no filler. The first sentence states exactly what the tool returns; the second frames the use case. Every word earns its place.
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 no-argument metadata tool, the description is reasonably complete: it enumerates the fields the agent will need for attribution. The lack of an output schema and explicit return-format details is a minor gap, but the description compensates by naming the expected content.
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 and the schema description coverage is effectively complete, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The baseline of 4 applies because nothing is missing on this dimension.
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 names a specific resource (Walkvo dataset) and the exact content (source, computed date, licence, citation). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like dataset_row or dataset_stats, so an agent can tell it apart without opening schemas.
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?
"Read this to attribute a figure correctly" gives a clear, practical context for when to use the tool. It does not explicitly list alternatives or negative cases, but the sibling names and the tool's metadata nature make that exclusion obvious.
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 targets a distinct query type (schema, exact match, substring search, multi-value comparison, stats, top/bottom, provenance), but dataset_row and dataset_compare overlap for single-value exact matches, and dataset_columns' provenance banner overlaps somewhat with dataset_provenance.
All tools share the dataset_ prefix and snake_case, but suffixes mix nouns (columns, provenance, row, stats) with verbs (compare, search) and an adjective (top), so the pattern isn't as uniform as a strict verb_noun convention.
Seven tools is a well-scoped set for read-only dataset exploration; each operation (schema, lookup, search, compare, stats, top, provenance) earns its place.
Covers the core dataset workflows: schema, exact and fuzzy lookup, comparisons, numeric summaries, and attribution. Minor gaps like grouped aggregations or multi-condition filters are absent but not essential for the stated purpose.