EQIQs

Start an assessment in chat

start_assessment

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get the questions for one EQIQs framework so the user can take it inside the chat. Ask them one at a time, word for word, accepting only A or B. Call with no framework to list what the user has not completed yet. Personal frameworks (attachment, love language) need the user's explicit consent. Read-only; costs 1 unit.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`context`	No
`framework`	No	Framework key. Omit to list remaining frameworks.
`personal_consent`	No	True only after explicit user consent to this personal framework.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`missing`	No	Frameworks still to take.
`completed`	No	Frameworks already completed.
`framework`	No	Framework whose questions are returned.
`questions`	No	Questions with A/B options.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 18, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / context

Added value: +{
+  "enum": [
+    "business",
+    "personal"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedInput schema / properties / framework / description

Previous value: -"Framework key, e.g. 'mbti', 'disc', 'enneagram', 'big_five'. Omit to list remaining frameworks."New value: +"Framework key. Omit to list remaining frameworks."

addedInput schema / properties / personal_consent

Added value: +{
+  "description": "True only after explicit user consent to this personal framework.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedSep 28, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "completed": {
+      "description": "Frameworks already completed.",
+      "items": {},
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "framework": {
+      "description": "Framework whose questions are returned.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "missing": {
+      "description": "Frameworks still to take.",
+      "items": {
+        "$ref": "#/properties/completed/items"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "questions": {
+      "description": "Questions with A/B options.",
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": {},
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedSep 25, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / framework / description

Added value: +"Framework key, e.g. 'mbti', 'disc', 'enneagram', 'big_five'. Omit to list remaining frameworks."

AddedSep 23, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world. The description adds value beyond these by disclosing the cost ('costs 1 unit'), the consent prerequisite for personal frameworks, and the exact interaction protocol (one question at a time, A/B only). It does not cover rate limits or error behavior, but the added context is substantial.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then usage instructions, then constraints and cost. Every sentence serves a purpose and the description is tight, though slightly dense with multiple imperatives in a row.

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?

Given the output schema exists (so return values need no explanation) and annotations cover safety/idempotency, the description supplies the missing behavioral and consent context. The only notable gap is failing to clarify the 'context' enum parameter, but overall it is sufficiently complete for correct invocation.

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 description coverage is 67%, so the schema documents two of three parameters. The description adds meaning for 'framework' (omitting it lists remaining frameworks) and for 'personal_consent' (explicit consent required for personal frameworks), but does not explain the 'context' enum (business/personal). This partially compensates for the coverage gap, warranting a baseline 3.

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 ('Get') and resource ('questions for one EQIQs framework') and clarifies the mode ('list what the user has not completed yet' when no framework is given). It does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling submit_assessment, but the start-vs-submit distinction is implied by 'so the user can take it inside the chat'.

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?

Provides clear operational context: ask questions one at a time, word for word, accept only A or B; call with no framework to list remaining frameworks; personal frameworks need explicit consent. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use or a direct comparison to alternatives like submit_assessment, but the usage conditions are well specified.

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

All EQIQs 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?