Fruityvice

Get Fruit

get_fruit

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get nutritional facts for a specific fruit. Returns calories, protein, fat, carbs, sugar, and fiber per 100g (e.g., 'apple', 'banana').

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes	The name of the fruit (e.g., "banana", "apple", "mango").

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	Unique identifier for the fruit
`name`	Yes	Name of the fruit
`genus`	Yes	Genus classification
`order`	Yes	Order classification
`family`	Yes	Plant family classification
`nutritions`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedMay 8, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "family": {
+      "description": "Plant family classification",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "genus": {
+      "description": "Genus classification",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "id": {
+      "description": "Unique identifier for the fruit",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "name": {
+      "description": "Name of the fruit",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "nutritions": {
+      "properties": {
+        "calories": {
+          "description": "Calories per 100g",
+          "type": "number"
+        },
+        "carbohydrates": {
+          "description": "Carbohydrates per 100g in grams",
+          "type": "number"
+        },
+        "fat": {
+          "description": "Fat content per 100g in grams",
+          "type": "number"
+        },
+        "protein": {
+          "description": "Protein content per 100g in grams",
+          "type": "number"
+        },
+        "sugar": {
+          "description": "Sugar content per 100g in grams",
+          "type": "number"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "calories",
+        "fat",
+        "sugar",
+        "carbohydrates",
+        "protein"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "order": {
+      "description": "Order classification",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "id",
+    "name",
+    "family",
+    "genus",
+    "order",
+    "nutritions"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedMay 6, 2026

addedInput schema / examples

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "name": "banana"
+  },
+  {
+    "name": "apple"
+  }
+]

First observedApr 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds value by disclosing the exact return fields (calories, protein, fat, carbs, sugar, fiber per 100g) and providing examples. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence states the purpose, return data, and examples. Every word contributes; no filler or redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter) and the presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool does and returns. It also handles the open-world hint appropriately by providing examples rather than an exhaustive list.

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% with a clear description for the 'name' parameter. The description's examples ('apple', 'banana') reinforce but do not add meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline without exceeding it.

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 and resource ('Get nutritional facts for a specific fruit') and clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like list_fruits and get_by_nutrition by specifying it targets a single named fruit and returns a defined set of nutritional fields.

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?

The description implies usage for retrieving details of a specific fruit, and the phrase 'for a specific fruit' differentiates it from listing or nutrition-based search tools. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it falls short of a 5.

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

All Fruityvice tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.