Skip to main content
Glama

Mongo ObjectId hex length, value discarded

by io.github.sadri-dridi
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

objectid-ok

Mongo ObjectId hex length, value 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

C2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does say the value is discarded, which is a useful transparency signal, but it omits whether the tool returns a boolean, throws on invalid input, performs I/O, or has any side effects. The schema notes like 'no disk access' belong to unrelated parameters, not to the ObjectId check.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is admirably short with no filler, and it front-loads the core concept. However, it is a fragment rather than a structured statement, and it sacrifices too much necessary information for brevity.

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

Completeness1/5

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

A callable tool needs to tell an agent which of the ten optional parameters holds the ObjectId and what response to expect. The description provides neither, and there is no output schema or annotations to fill the gap. With many sibling validators, an agent cannot reliably select or invoke this tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the ten properties (ref, url, city, feed, host, json, path, zone, query, website) have no visible connection to Mongo ObjectIds, and the description does not indicate which parameter carries the value to check. The high coverage is effectively irrelevant because it documents parameters that do not match the tool's stated purpose.

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 a fragment—'Mongo ObjectId hex length, value discarded'—that implies ObjectId shape validation but never specifies what the tool does, what it returns, or which input it checks. It does not clearly state 'validates whether a string is a 24-character hex ObjectId', and none of the schema properties is labeled as an ObjectId, so an agent cannot map the purpose onto an argument.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus sibling shape/validation tools such as jira-key-shape, domain-shape, or validate-json. The only implied trigger is having a Mongo ObjectId, but the description does not state when-not to use it or mention alternatives.

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

All Mongo ObjectId hex length, value 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