Return a dated MAK source-verification ledger snapshot for selected Canadian immigration evidence rules. Each entry names the official source, what the checked source establishes, the recheck date and an explicit limitation. This is source verification, not individualized immigration advice.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| entry | Yes | Choose all current ledger entries or one bounded verification entry. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already flag readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds useful context: entries include official source, what is established, recheck date, and an explicit limitation. The disclaimer that this is not immigration advice helps set expectations beyond the schema.
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?
Three short sentences front-load the main action, describe the return-entry fields, and add a one-line boundary disclaimer. Every sentence contributes and there is no filler.
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 simple read-only tool with one enum parameter and no output schema, the description adequately explains what will be returned and the nature of the data. Nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.
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?
Schema coverage is 100%, and the single enum parameter has a meaningful description ('Choose all current ledger entries or one bounded verification entry'). The tool description adds no parameter-level detail, so a baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 names a specific verb ('Return'), a specific resource ('dated MAK source-verification ledger snapshot'), and the content fields of each entry. It does not explicitly compare itself to sibling tools like get_mak_topic_sources, so it falls just short of full sibling differentiation.
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?
The description clearly implies this is for source-verification lookups and explicitly excludes individualized immigration advice. However, it gives no guidance on when to choose this over the sibling tools, leaving the agent to infer the fit.
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.
Each tool addresses a clearly distinct resource: a dated evidence ledger, RCIC contact information, and curated topic source sets. There is little overlap in purpose or output.
All three tools follow the same get_mak_ pattern with a descriptive object suffix: change_ledger, rcic_contact, topic_sources. The naming is uniform, predictable, and immediately signals the tool's target.
Three tools is well-scoped for a focused immigration source guide. Each tool earns its place and avoids unnecessary surface area.
The set covers the core needs of a source guide: evidence rule snapshots, topic source sets, and human contact. A minor gap is the lack of a tool to list available topics or ledger entries, which would aid discoverability.