Публичные MCP-серверы семьи Atomno из этого каталога (ЕГРЮЛ, ФНС, ФССП, курсы ЦБ и др.). Только то, что уже есть на сайте.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds useful context by noting the servers are public, come from the catalog, and only include what is already on the site. However, it does not describe other behavioral traits such as ordering, filtering, or whether the list is complete.
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?
The description is short and front-loaded, with the main point in the first sentence. The second sentence reinforces an availability constraint, though it slightly overlaps with 'from this catalog'. Overall, it is appropriately sized and readable.
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?
For a parameterless list tool with an output schema, the description conveys the essential scope: it lists public Atomno-family servers that are present in the catalog. It could be improved by clarifying how this relates to sibling tools, but the description is sufficient for a straight list operation.
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?
The tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is effectively complete, so the description does not need to explain parameter details. The baseline is high because there are no input semantics to clarify.
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?
The description states a clear verb and resource: it lists the public Atomno-family MCP servers from the catalog, with examples of included categories. It is understandable and distinct in content, but it does not explicitly contrast itself with the sibling tools like get_server or search_servers.
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?
There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as search_servers or get_server. The phrase 'from this catalog' and 'only what is already on the site' imply a scope restriction, but the description does not explain when listing is preferable to searching or fetching a single server.
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.
Tools are mostly distinct: get_server is exact lookup by slug, search_servers is query-based discovery, list_categories returns categories, and list_atomno_servers returns a specific family subset. Some overlap exists between search_servers and list_atomno_servers as both return sets of servers, but descriptions clarify the intent well enough.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun lowercase snake_case pattern: get_server, list_atomno_servers, list_categories, search_servers. The naming is uniform and predictable.
Four tools is a reasonable, focused scope for a catalog lookup service. Each tool serves a distinct purpose—exact lookup, search, category listing, and a curated family listing—without unnecessary bloat.
The catalog covers lookup, search, and category counts, but lacks a way to browse all servers or list servers within a category, which is a notable gap for a catalog API. The Atomno-specific listing is also oddly narrow and does not compensate for the missing general browse capability.