Skip to main content
Glama

Zoning Signal

by com.zoningsignal
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Describe Entity

describe_entity
Read-onlyIdempotent

Return the full structured dossier for a named entity — the canonical citable artifact for any actor, organization, ordinance, or project the corpus references. Returns: voxel_lead (134-167 word voxel-disciplined identity prose), canonical_role, the class-specific cluster (person.voting_record for board members; organization.type + jurisdiction; legislation.legal_status + effective_date + sunset_date + citation; creative_work.work_type + status + case_number), the bidirectional graph references (appears_in_meetings, appears_in_briefs, appears_in_watches, exhibits_patterns, related_entities, related_places, related_corridors), the provenance_chain, and the canonical surfaces (dossier URL, schema_id, decoder_index_hub). Each schema_id (/entities/{slug}#{class.toLowerCase()}) is the stable cross-page Schema.org reference — Person / Organization / Legislation / CreativeWork — that AI agents resolve to when citing the entity. Use when grounding a citation, when reasoning about an entity's full role across the corpus, or when traversing the entity graph from a single name. This dossier answers what one node touches; trace_connection answers what joins two of them and how specific that join is.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugYesThe entity slug (e.g., "sb-180", "hanover-land-company", "anita-geraci-carver"). Use list_entities to discover available slugs. The Decoder Index hub at /entities lists every entity grouped by class.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYes
slugYes
personNo
named_atNo
schema_idYes
voxel_leadNo
last_activeNo
legislationNo
display_nameYes
entity_classYes
organizationNo
creative_workNo
canonical_roleNo
related_placesNo
provenance_chainNo
related_entitiesNo
appears_in_briefsNo
exhibits_patternsNo
appears_in_watchesNo
appears_in_meetingsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "appears_in_briefs": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "appears_in_meetings": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "appears_in_watches": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "canonical_role": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "creative_work": {
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "display_name": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "entity_class": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "exhibits_patterns": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "last_active": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "legislation": {
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "named_at": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "organization": {
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "person": {
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "provenance_chain": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "related_entities": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "related_places": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "schema_id": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "slug": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "url": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "voxel_lead": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "slug",
+    "display_name",
+    "entity_class",
+    "url",
+    "schema_id"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive, and the description adds meaningful behavioral context: it returns the stable canonical schema_id reference for citation and clearly scopes its answer to one node. It also discloses that it is not the tool for pair-wise graph relationships, which is useful beyond the structured hints.

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?

The description is long but front-loaded with the core purpose and organized into return contents, use cases, and a distinction from trace_connection. Every sentence carries substantive information, though the dense list of return fields could have been slightly condensed.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given a single documented parameter, rich annotations, and an output schema, the description is complete for an agent: it explains what the tool returns, why the dossier is canonical, when to use it, and how it differs from the related traversal tool. Nothing needed for correct invocation is missing.

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?

The input schema already has 100% coverage of the single slug parameter, including examples and discovery guidance via list_entities and the /entities hub. The main description does not add much semantic detail about the parameter itself, so the baseline of 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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Return the full structured dossier for a named entity,' and immediately identifies it as the canonical citable artifact. It distinguishes itself from siblings by naming trace_connection as the tool for relationships between two entities rather than one.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It explicitly states when to use this tool: 'when grounding a citation, when reasoning about an entity's full role across the corpus, or when traversing the entity graph from a single name.' It also names the alternative trace_connection and explains the boundary: 'This dossier answers what one node touches; trace_connection answers what joins two of them.'

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

All Zoning Signal 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