describe_agent
Fleet-standard self-description.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Output Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
agent-escrow
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
D1.8/5.0
Behavior1/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits (e.g., whether it reads or mutates state, authentication needs, or performance characteristics).
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 only two words, which is too minimal to be considered concise; it sacrifices clarity for brevity.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness2/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the lack of parameters and presence of an output schema, the description should explain the return value or purpose. It does not, leaving the tool inadequately specified.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters2/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool has zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. However, the description adds no meaning beyond the empty schema; it fails to explain what the tool does or what output it produces.
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?
Description 'Fleet-standard self-description' is vague. It does not specify what the tool returns or distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'open_escrow' or 'list_escrows'.
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 on when to use this tool, what context it is appropriate for, or how it relates to alternatives.
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
A3.5/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose covering specific lifecycle actions (open, fund, release, refund, dispute) and queries (status, list, audit). No overlap in functionality.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., open_escrow, fund_escrow, list_escrows), with no mixing of conventions.
Tool Count5/5
9 tools is well-scoped for an escrow system, covering all necessary operations without excess or deficiency.
Completeness5/5
Complete lifecycle coverage: open, fund, release, refund, dispute, status, list, audit, plus self-description. Refund also handles cancellation of OPEN escrows, filling a potential gap.