turva-mcp

Engagement principles

get_principles

Read-onlyIdempotent

Returns turva.dev's engagement principles: async-only, least access, the result shows up in scanner numbers, and open and verifiable. Use this when a user asks how turva.dev works with clients or what rules an engagement follows. For what is sold and what it costs use get_services instead, and for how to start use get_contact. Read-only: returns static JSON that is compiled into the Worker, so it changes nothing and updates only on deploy.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`model`	Yes
`rules`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedSep 23, 2026

addedInput schema / $schema

Added value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "model": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "rules": {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": false,
+        "properties": {
+          "id": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "rationale": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "title": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "id",
+          "title",
+          "rationale"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "model",
+    "rules"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedJul 29, 2026
- removedInput schema / $schema
```
Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
```
First observedJun 24, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the bar for extra value is met here. The description adds concrete context by explaining the data is static JSON compiled into the Worker, changes nothing, and only updates on deploy—useful behavioral detail beyond the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three sentences carry the full message: what is returned, when to use it, and which sibling tools cover adjacent cases. The read-only clarification is folded in efficiently without repetition or filler.

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?

For a simple parameterless getter, the description covers output content, usage triggers, sibling routing, and behavioral guarantees. An output schema exists, so return-value shape is already handled; nothing necessary for correct invocation is missing.

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?

This tool has zero parameters and 100% schema description coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies there is no input to configure and focuses on output content, which is sufficient for a parameterless tool.

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: 'Returns turva.dev's engagement principles,' and lists the actual content of those principles. It also differentiates from siblings by explicitly naming get_services and get_contact as covering different concerns.

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 an explicit trigger: 'Use this when a user asks how turva.dev works with clients or what rules an engagement follows.' It also states exclusions and alternatives: use get_services for pricing and get_contact for how to start, leaving no ambiguity about when to choose this tool.

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

All turva-mcp tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?