Skip to main content
Glama

canton-ccpedia

by io.github.UnityNodes

compare_governance_outcomes

Read-onlyIdempotent

Aggregate governance throughput over a window: CIPs that changed status (approved / rejected / advanced), counts of cip-vote and cip-discuss mailing activity, and dev-fund proposals opened in the window that are closed today (merged, withdrawn and rejected are not distinguished; no close dates are stored). Canton-specific. Use to summarise "what governance has shipped this quarter?".

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
window_daysNoWindow in days, 7-365 (default 90).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / window_days / default
      Added value: +90
    • changedInput schema / properties / window_days / description
      Previous value: -"Window in days, 7-365."New value: +"Window in days, 7-365 (default 90)."
    • removedInput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "window_days"
-]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses important behavioral details: merged/withdrawn/rejected dev-fund proposals are not distinguished, no close dates are stored, and results are Canton-specific. Since annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, the description adds the data-limitation context an agent needs.

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?

The description is two sentences and every clause earns its place: the first states the action, lists the metric groups, and includes key caveats; the second scopes the tool and gives a concrete summary question. There is no filler or redundant repetition of schema fields.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must explain what the tool returns. It does a good job by enumerating the metric groups and the subtle closure caveat. A slightly more explicit description of the response grouping or shape would make it fully complete, but the current content is sufficient 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?

The input schema fully documents window_days with type, default, minimum, maximum, and a description, giving 100% schema coverage. The description reinforces that the window applies to all metric groups and clarifies the 'opened in the window ... closed today' semantics, but it does not add material information beyond the schema.

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 ('Aggregate governance throughput over a window') and enumerates exactly what is included: CIP status changes, mailing activity counts, and dev-fund proposal closures. This clearly distinguishes it from single-record or list governance tools like get_governance_vote, get_cip_votes, and list_governance_votes by its aggregated, windowed scope.

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?

The description provides a concrete use case: 'Use to summarise what governance has shipped this quarter?' This tells an agent when to select the tool. It does not name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it falls short of a 5.

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

All canton-ccpedia toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Many tools have overlapping search/retrieval functionality (search, semantic_search, full_context, search_community, search_github_issues, etc.), and the CIP-specific variants (get_cip, get_cip_history, get_cip_votes, get_cip_mentions, get_cip_citations) are numerous and subtly differentiated. Despite cross-references in the descriptions, the boundaries are fine-grained and an agent is likely to misselect among the 8+ search tools or the 8+ CIP tools.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (get_x, list_x, search_x, find_x). Mixed styles or camelCase are absent, and the verb choice (get, list, search, find, detect, compare) is semantically appropriate to each action, making the naming highly predictable.

Tool Count1/5

With 88 tools, the surface is extremely overgrown for a single server, far exceeding the 25+ 'too many' threshold and approaching the 50+ 'extreme mismatch' category. Even for a comprehensive ecosystem knowledge base, this creates a massive selection burden and makes the tool set unwieldy for agents.

Completeness5/5

The server covers the full Canton ecosystem: docs, forum, mailing lists, GitHub, CIPs, governance, validators, versions, deprecations, security, and media. There are no glaring gaps in the knowledge domain; every major resource type has retrieval and analysis tools, making the coverage exhaustive with no obvious dead ends.

Resources