Skip to main content
Glama

BC Curriculum

by io.github.pdg6

Get Competency Connections

get_competency_connections
Read-onlyIdempotent

Find curricular competencies that appear across multiple subjects or courses. Useful for interdisciplinary curriculum design and identifying transferable skills.

Args:

  • competency_text (string): A competency description to find connections for

  • scope (string, optional): Where to search ('same_subject', 'cross_subject', 'all'). Default 'all'.

Returns: Related competencies from other courses/subjects with similarity ranking.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
scopeNoWhere to search for related competenciesall
competency_textYesA competency description to find connections for

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare this as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds behavioral details such as the default scope ('Default 'all'') and the return format ('Related competencies from other courses/subjects with similarity ranking'). This goes beyond annotations without contradicting them.

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 concise and well-organized, starting with a one-sentence purpose, then a use-case clause, a concise Args list, and a Returns line. No unnecessary text.

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

Completeness5/5

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 two parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage context, parameter details, and return values. This is sufficient for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

The input schema already covers both parameters with descriptions and the enum/default for scope. The description repeats this information without adding extra meaning, so it meets the baseline for full schema coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb 'Find' and identifies the resource as 'curricular competencies that appear across multiple subjects or courses,' which clearly states the tool's function. It also provides a use case ('interdisciplinary curriculum design') and differentiates from generic search by focusing on connections.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It states the tool is 'Useful for interdisciplinary curriculum design and identifying transferable skills,' giving context for when to use it. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions relative to sibling tools like search_cross_curricular.

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

All BC Curriculum toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Each tool has a distinct primary purpose: listing courses, fetching full curriculum, searching, tracking progression, and finding cross-curricular connections. The only potential overlap is between get_competency_connections and search_cross_curricular, both of which handle cross-subject discovery, but they differ in input and output (one is competency-text-driven, the other is grade-and-subject-comparison-driven), so confusion is unlikely with clear descriptions.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using snake_case: get_ for retrievals, list_ for enumeration, and search_ for searching. The naming clearly reflects each tool's function, and there are no mixed conventions or vague verbs.

Tool Count5/5

Eight tools is a well-scoped count for a curriculum data server. The set covers the essential needs: discovery (list_courses, search_curriculum), detailed retrieval (get_course_curriculum), cross-curricular analysis (get_competency_connections, search_cross_curricular), progression tracking (get_grade_progression), and change monitoring (get_course_history, get_curriculum_changes). Each tool earns its place without redundancy.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface is quite complete for read-only curriculum access and analysis: it covers listing, full retrieval, search, cross-subject comparison, grade progression, and change/history tracking. A minor gap is that there is no dedicated tool to enumerate subjects or grades independently, though list_courses can filter by subject/grade and indirectly provides that information.

Resources