Islam West Africa Collection (IWAC)

Press language metrics

get_lexical_metrics

Read-onlyIdempotent

Text length, lexical richness and readability by country/newspaper/year. Metrics are precomputed; readability is French-specific and excludes other languages. Missing values are disclosed. Compare distributions as descriptive evidence.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`exact`	No	AND values. Fields: subject/spatial/author/language/country/newspaper/topic_id/min_prob/scored_by; country_raw=whole cell; polarity:<model>.
`top_n`	No	Groups returned when grouping by newspaper (default 20, max 60)
`country`	No	Exact country name (accents optional)
`date_to`	No
`keyword`	No
`subject`	No	Exact tag
`group_by`	No	year (default) \| newspaper \| country
`date_from`	No	Inclusive date bounds: YYYY[-MM[-DD]]
`newspaper`	No	Newspaper/periodical substring
`hijri_year`	No
`hijri_month`	No
`keyword_mode`	No
`keyword_aliases`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`note`	No
`view`	Yes
`groups`	Yes
`filters`	Yes
`metrics`	Yes
`group_by`	Yes
`total_matches`	Yes
`readability_excluded`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed14 schema fields changedOct 6, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / country / description

Previous value: -"Exact country name: Benin | Burkina Faso | Côte d'Ivoire | Niger | Nigeria | Togo (accents optional)"New value: +"Exact country name (accents optional)"

changedInput schema / properties / date_from / description

Previous value: -"YYYY-MM-DD (or YYYY)"New value: +"Inclusive date bounds: YYYY[-MM[-DD]]"

removedInput schema / properties / date_to / description
```
Removed value: -"YYYY-MM-DD (or YYYY)"
```

addedInput schema / properties / exact

Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": {
+    "items": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "maxItems": 20,
+    "minItems": 1,
+    "type": "array"
+  },
+  "description": "AND values. Fields: subject/spatial/author/language/country/newspaper/topic_id/min_prob/scored_by; country_raw=whole cell; polarity:<model>.",
+  "propertyNames": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / hijri_month
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
addedInput schema / properties / hijri_year
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "integer"
+}
```

removedInput schema / properties / keyword / description

Removed value: -"ONE French concept keyword; substring over the subset's text fields"

addedInput schema / properties / keyword / minLength
```
Added value: +1
```

addedInput schema / properties / keyword_aliases

Added value: +{
+  "items": {
+    "minLength": 1,
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "maxItems": 12,
+  "type": "array"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / keyword_mode

Added value: +{
+  "enum": [
+    "literal",
+    "all_terms"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedInput schema / properties / newspaper / description

Previous value: -"Newspaper (articles) or periodical/series title (publications)"New value: +"Newspaper/periodical substring"

changedInput schema / properties / subject / description

Previous value: -"Exact subject tag (pipe-aware)"New value: +"Exact tag"

removedInput schema / properties / top_n / maximum
```
Removed value: -9007199254740991
```
removedInput schema / properties / top_n / minimum
```
Removed value: --9007199254740991
```

Changed2 schema fields changedJul 29, 2026

changedInput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

changedOutput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

AddedJul 28, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare this as a safe, idempotent, non-destructive read. The description adds genuinely non-structured behavioral context: metrics are precomputed, readability is French-specific and excludes other languages, and missing values are disclosed. This is useful caveat-level detail beyond the annotations.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with what is returned, followed by caveats and intended use. Efficient with little waste, though the grouping scope and caveats could be ordered slightly more tightly.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Output schema exists, so return-format explanation is unnecessary, and annotations cover safety. But for a 13-parameter tool with nested objects and only 54% parameter coverage, the description leaves substantial filtering behavior undocumented, making it only minimally complete for its complexity.

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?

With 54% schema coverage across 13 parameters, the schema documents roughly half. The description ties outputs to country/newspaper/year (mapping to group_by) but adds no syntax or meaning for the other parameters such as exact, keyword_mode, or keyword_aliases. It compensates only marginally for the coverage gap, so a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description names a specific resource (text length, lexical richness, readability) and its grouping dimensions (country/newspaper/year), which lets an agent recognize this as the lexical-metrics retrieval tool. It is clear but does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling distribution tools like get_field_distribution or get_temporal_distribution.

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?

'Compare distributions as descriptive evidence' implies the intended analytical use, giving some guidance. However, there is no explicit when-to-use vs. when-not, and no mention of alternatives among the many sibling distribution/corpus tools.

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

All Islam West Africa Collection (IWAC) 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.