WIA360: AI session probe and match

get_match

Read-onlyIdempotent

Compute the compatibility match between a human WIA360 KYEOL profile and the AI session profile built up via score_session calls under the same session_ref. Human axis values come from the human's WIA360 Quick or full assessment result (initiative/verification/pivot/adventure raw scores). Without paid=true, only matched_axis_count/available_axis_count are returned (free teaser) — pass paid=true only when the human has an active paid WIA360 profile, to reveal score/grade/heatmap/priming prompts.

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": {
      "session_ref": "<session_ref>",
      "h_initiative": "<h_initiative>",
      "h_verification": "<h_verification>",
      "h_pivot": "<h_pivot>",
      "h_adventure": "<h_adventure>"
    },
    "name": "get_match"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`paid`	No	Set true only for an active paid WIA360 profile — reveals full grade/heatmap/priming prompts instead of the free teaser.
`h_pivot`	Yes	Human pivot axis raw score (adaptability-persistence difference, roughly -4..4).
`h_adventure`	Yes	Human adventure axis raw score (1-5 average).
`session_ref`	Yes
`h_initiative`	Yes	Human initiative axis raw score (1-5 average, from WIA360 result).
`h_verification`	Yes	Human verification axis raw score (1-5 average).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 17, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive/closed-world, but the description adds genuine behavioral context beyond them: the paid gate changes the returned payload (teaser counts vs score/grade/heatmap/priming prompts) and identifies where human axis values originate. It does not cover failure modes or what happens with mismatched refs.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded and every clause carries information (dependency, value source, paid gate). Sentence two is long and em-dash-heavy, but no sentence is filler, so it stays near-optimal for the tool's complexity.

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 admirably discloses the two return shapes (free teaser counts vs full grade/heatmap/priming), the required dependency, and the paid condition. It omits error handling and any notion of stale or missing session data, leaving a small gap for a 5-required-parameter tool.

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 83%, so each axis parameter and paid are already documented in the schema. The description restates the four axis values and their WIA360 source, largely duplicating the schema's own '(1-5 average, from WIA360 result)' notes; it adds little new per-parameter meaning, so baseline 3 holds.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb and resource ('Compute the compatibility match') and grounds it in the AI session profile built via score_session, so the agent knows exactly what artifact it produces. It clearly names the sibling score_session as a data dependency but never mentions run_probe, leaving one sibling relationship undifferentiated.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives a clear prerequisite (a session profile already built via score_session under the same session_ref) and an explicit condition for the paid flag ('only when the human has an active paid WIA360 profile'). It stops short of stating when to call get_match versus score_session/run_probe in a workflow, so no explicit exclus...(truncated).

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

All WIA360: AI session probe and match 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?