Skip to main content
Glama

[core] agent start

get_agent_start
Read-only

Start here: machine-readable scenarios (step1 -> step2 -> step3), which GeoQuant calls to make first, how to say hello (POST /api/hello) and the freshness contract. Call this when you connect for the first time or are unsure which tool fits.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_agent_start"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful content context (scenarios, hello endpoint, freshness contract) but says nothing about the response shape, size, or whether the payload changes over time — with annotations carrying the read-only burden, a 3 is appropriate.

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?

Two sentences, with the imperative 'Start here' front-loaded so the agent immediately knows this is the entry point. The parenthetical '(step1 -> step2 -> step3)' and endpoint path add density but earn their place as concrete content hints.

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?

For a no-parameter, no-output-schema orientation tool, the description covers what the agent gets back (scenarios, first calls, hello call, freshness contract) well enough to justify invoking it. A brief note on the payload format would make it complete, but nothing essential is absent.

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?

Zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline of 4 applies. No parameter guidance is needed or missing.

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?

The description states a concrete purpose — an orientation/onboarding payload containing step-by-step scenarios, the recommended first calls, the hello handshake, and the freshness contract. It distinguishes itself from data-fetching siblings ('Start here') without naming a specific alternative, so it falls just short of 5.

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 gives explicit call conditions: 'when you connect for the first time or are unsure which tool fits.' That is a clear, self-selecting trigger an agent can act on without inspecting other tools.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources