health_check
Server health/status metadata.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
precisioncalc-mcp
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
C2/5.0
Behavior1/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, and the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention what the tool returns, whether it makes network calls, or any other operational behavior, offering no transparency.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness2/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is extremely brief but not in a useful way. 'Server health/status metadata' simply rephrases the tool name without adding informative content, making it under-specified rather than concise.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness1/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain what the health check provides (e.g., status codes, metrics, latency). It does not, leaving the tool's purpose and return value completely unexplained.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters4/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
With zero parameters, the schema is already complete for parameter definition. The description need not add parameter details, and the baseline of 4 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose2/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description 'Server health/status metadata' is vague and nearly tautological, restating the tool name 'health_check' without specifying a concrete action. It does not clearly differentiate from sibling tools beyond being non-calculation-related.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines2/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without direction.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool targets a distinct calculation domain: business days, SaaS metrics, compound growth, FX, depreciation, IRR, NPV, loans, and batch execution. The only closely related pair (IRR and NPV) is clearly differentiated by descriptions.
Naming Consistency3/5
Most tools use snake_case, but the pattern is mixed: calculate_metric and list_metrics are verb-first, currency_convert is verb-last, batch_calculate starts with a modifier, and the rest are noun phrases like loan_amortization and net_present_value. This inconsistency could cause minor confusion but remains readable.
Tool Count5/5
11 tools is well within the typical range for a specialized calculator server. Each tool covers a distinct area, and the auxiliary tools (list_metrics, batch_calculate, health_check) support the core set without bloat.
Completeness4/5
The server covers a broad swath of business/finance calculations: time-value-of-money (NPV, IRR, compound growth), loans, depreciation, currency, business days, and SaaS metrics. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no general unit conversion or statistical functions), but for the stated purpose the surface is complete.