Skip to main content
Glama

CityHash hex length, input discarded

by io.github.sadri-dridi
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

cityhash-len

CityHash hex length, input discarded

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
refNoGit ref name; discarded after the shape check
urlNoHTTPS URL to normalize or cite
cityNoCity name for a public weather hint; discarded after the call
feedNoPublic RSS or Atom URL; titles discarded
hostNoPublic hostname
jsonNoJSON text to validate; discarded after the check
pathNoFile path to check; no disk access
zoneNoIANA timezone name
queryNoSearch text; discarded after the length check
websiteNoPublic https website (homepage domain) to check for agent readiness: robots.txt, llms.txt, sitemap.xml, extractable HTML. Bounded, identified, robots-respecting.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / website
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Public https website (homepage domain) to check for agent readiness: robots.txt, llms.txt, sitemap.xml, extractable HTML. Bounded, identified, robots-respecting.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

C2.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, but it only says 'input discarded.' It does not disclose whether the tool makes external calls, has side effects, depends on any parameter, or what it returns. Minimal behavioral disclosure is not enough for safe, correct invocation.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is short and front-loaded, but brevity is not the same as conciseness. It is a fragment rather than a complete specification and omits the verb and operational meaning needed to select and invoke the tool confidently.

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

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

There is no output schema, no annotations, and 10 optional parameters, so the description must explain the return value and invocation context, but it only gives a cryptic noun phrase. It does not state the output format, whether input is truly required, or when to call this tool. This is materially incomplete.

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%, so a baseline of 3 applies even though the tool description itself adds little parameter meaning. The global 'input discarded' hints that the optional parameters may be ignored, but it does not clarify whether any parameter is needed or how the 10 inputs relate to the CityHash length result. The schema's parameter descriptions carry the semantic weight.

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

Purpose2/5

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

The description is essentially a noun phrase restating the tool name: 'CityHash hex length' adds no verb or resource explaining what the tool does. 'Input discarded' is a behavioral note, not a purpose. An agent cannot tell whether this tool computes, returns, validates, or checks a hash length.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus any of the 29 siblings, such as search-query-len, normalize-url, or validate-json. It provides no contextual trigger, no prerequisites, and no alternatives. This is a no-guidance case.

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

All CityHash hex length, input discarded 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