Search across release-notes bodies of all indexed Canton repos for a feature/keyword. Canton-specific. Use to find which release first mentioned X.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| feature | Yes | Feature keyword, e.g. "logical synchronizer", "topology", "wallet kernel". |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive. Description adds scope (all indexed Canton repos) and purpose beyond annotations. No contradictions.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two concise sentences, front-loaded with key action and scope. No filler or extraneous information.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given simple schema (one param, no output schema), description fully covers purpose and usage. Lacks output format details, but not required.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% with description for 'feature'. Description does not add additional parameter details beyond schema, but explains usage context. Meets baseline.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description clearly states the action (search), resource (release notes), scope (Canton repos), and purpose (find first release mentioning X). Distinguishes from sibling tools like search.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicitly states when to use (to find which release first mentioned X) and implicitly scopes to Canton. Could improve by noting alternatives, but sufficient.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
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.
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.
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.
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.