Rosetta Quantum — PQC exposure

ver_propagacion

Devuelve los sitios PREDICHOS por caminata cuántica para un blanco de una corrida, con el métrico usado, su pre-registro, y la matriz de conectividad por referencia con firma para poder comprobarla. Declara siempre que NO están validados experimentalmente, y el número de sitios es el real: si son menos de cinco, se declaran menos.

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": {
      "run_id": "<run_id>"
    },
    "name": "ver_propagacion"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`run_id`	Yes	p.ej. cleveland-2026-08-ciego
`target`	No	opcional: KRAS_4OBE, ABL1_1OPL, MYOSIN_5TBY, MYC_1NKP

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 13, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full burden and does so well: it discloses the epistemic caveat that results are NOT experimentally validated and commit to honest cardinality ("si son menos de cinco, se declaran menos"). It also explains that the connectivity matrix is returned by reference with a signature so it can be verified, which is real behavioral context rather than restatement.

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, front-loaded with what is returned, then the disclosure caveats. The load is dense but each clause carries information an agent needs; nothing is padding.

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 2-parameter read tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the returned content, its validation status, and count semantics adequately. Minor gaps remain around whether target omission is allowed and what the reference/signature payload looks like, but nothing essential 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and both parameters are documented there, including example values for target, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema about run_id format or what happens when target is omitted.

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 concrete verb and resource: "Devuelve los sitios PREDICHOS por caminata cuántica para un blanco de una corrida", and enumerates the accompanying payload (métrico, pre-registro, matriz de conectividad). It is unmistakably different from sibling listing/viewing tools, though it never names or contrasts an alternative explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied by the scoping phrase "para un blanco de una corrida", which tells the agent it operates on an existing run and an optional target. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not, no mention of prerequisites (e.g., that the run must already exist), and no routing to a sibling tool.

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

All Rosetta Quantum — PQC exposure 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?