describe_agent
Return capabilities and input contract.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Output Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
wavefunction-search
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool returns capabilities and input contract, implying a read-only operation, but lacks details on state modification, security, or side effects. The description is adequate but could be more explicit about safety.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness5/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single short sentence starting with a verb, wasting no words. It is maximally concise while still conveying the core purpose.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness4/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The tool is simple with no parameters and has an output schema, so the description need not explain return values. However, it lacks a note about being safe/read-only, which would enhance completeness. Overall, it is nearly complete for this tool's 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?
Schema coverage is 100% trivially (0 parameters). Description adds no parameter information, but none is needed. Baseline of 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 uses a clear verb 'Return' and specifies the resource as 'capabilities and input contract'. However, the resource is somewhat abstract and not explicitly tied to the agent's own introspection, which slightly reduces clarity.
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 its siblings (collapse, find_matches, intake, register_collective). There is no mention of context or 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
C2.9/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool has a distinct role in the workflow: intake captures user input, collapse finalizes commitment, find_matches searches the index, register_collective adds to the index, and describe_agent returns metadata. No overlap in purpose.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tool names use imperative verbs with consistent snake_case for compound names (describe_agent, find_matches, register_collective). Simple names collapse and intake follow the same pattern.
Tool Count5/5
Five tools appropriately cover the core workflow of intention intake, commitment, matching, registration, and self-description. The count is well-scoped for a specialized search server.
Completeness4/5
The tool set covers the primary use case, but lacks update/deregister operations for collectives. However, these are not essential for the search-focused purpose, so only a minor gap.