last_pulseFetch the most recent NIST Randomness Beacon pulse: a publicly verifiable, timestamped 512-bit random value signed by NIST, updated every 60 seconds.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| pulse | No | Pulse data object | |
| statusCode | No | HTTP status code |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {}
+]Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "properties": {
+ "pulse": {
+ "description": "Pulse data object",
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "statusCode": {
+ "description": "HTTP status code",
+ "type": "integer"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, open world. The description adds useful behavioral context: the value is signed by NIST and updated every 60 seconds. 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.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Single sentence, front-loaded with the verb 'Fetch'. Every word adds value, no fluff.
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?
Given no parameters and an existing output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does: fetches the latest pulse with its key attributes. No additional information is necessary.
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?
No parameters exist, so the description need not add parameter info. The schema coverage is 100%, and the description mentions no parameters, which is appropriate. Baseline 4.
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 clearly states it fetches the most recent NIST Randomness Beacon pulse, specifying the output as a publicly verifiable, timestamped 512-bit random value signed by NIST. This distinguishes it from siblings like pulse_at (which likely fetches a specific timestamp).
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 implies usage for the latest pulse by saying 'most recent'. It provides clear context but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool. Given the sibling list, the description could be more explicit, but overall it is adequate.
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.