Skip to main content
Glama

Usgs Volcano

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Ask Pipeworx Beta

ask_pipeworx_beta
Read-onlyIdempotent

Beta version of ask_pipeworx: identical universal router (same 6,447 tools, same arguments, same response shape) with candidate routing improvements enabled live whenever one is under test. A candidate routing prompt (v9-eval-disjoint-examples) is live on every call here; ask_pipeworx serves it to a slice of traffic only. Use it exactly like ask_pipeworx when you want the newest routing; results are compared against the stable router to decide what merges. Falls back to nothing — this IS a full working router, just the experimental edge.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qNoAlias for question.
askNoAlias for question.
textNoAlias for question.
inputNoAlias for question.
queryNoAlias for question.
promptNoAlias for question.
messageNoAlias for question.
questionYesYour question or request in natural language. Accepts query, q, prompt, text, input, ask, message as aliases.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "question": "What is the current US unemployment rate?"
+  }
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / ask
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Alias for question.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / message
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Alias for question.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / question / description
      Previous value: -"Your question or request in natural language. Accepts query, q, prompt, text, input as aliases."New value: +"Your question or request in natural language. Accepts query, q, prompt, text, input, ask, message as aliases."
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover readOnly/idempotent/openWorld/destructive, and the description adds real context beyond them: a candidate routing prompt is live on every call, results are compared against the stable router, and it 'falls back to nothing' (full-functioning, not a degraded stub). It stops short of describing latency, cost, or failure modes.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the essential identity and routing rule, then the fallback clarification. It is a bit repetitive ('same 6,447 tools, same arguments, same response shape') and leans on em-dash asides, but no sentence is filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by asserting the response shape matches ask_pipeworx, and it explains the experimental routing and comparison purpose. Missing only the explicit alias list, which the schema itself already carries.

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 description coverage is 100% and the alias parameters are self-documenting, so the description only needs to note 'same arguments' as ask_pipeworx. That is accurate but adds no new parameter meaning beyond the schema, which is the baseline case.

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?

States precisely what this is: a beta twin of ask_pipeworx running the same universal router with candidate routing prompts live on every call. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling ask_pipeworx by scope of traffic, so an agent can route between them without opening either schema.

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?

Gives a clear selection rule ('use it exactly like ask_pipeworx when you want the newest routing') and explains that the stable router serves the candidate prompt only to a slice of traffic. It does not state a when-not case (e.g., prefer stable routing for reproducible/production results), so it falls short of fully explicit alternative guidance.

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

All Usgs Volcano toolsInspect
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.

Resources