sdbm hex, input discarded

sdbm-ok

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "sdbm-ok"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ref`	No	Git ref name; discarded after the shape check
`url`	No	HTTPS URL to normalize or cite
`city`	No	City name for a public weather hint; discarded after the call
`feed`	No	Public RSS or Atom URL; titles discarded
`host`	No	Public hostname
`json`	No	JSON text to validate; discarded after the check
`path`	No	File path to check; no disk access
`zone`	No	IANA timezone name
`query`	No	Search text; discarded after the length check
`website`	No	Public 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.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 23, 2026

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"
+}

First observedSep 9, 2026

TDQS

D1.4/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only says 'input discarded,' which is vague and does not explain what the tool does with any of the inputs, whether it performs side effects, or what it returns. There is no mention of safety, side effects, or operational characteristics.

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 extremely short, which is concise, but it lacks the substance needed to be useful. It does not front-load any meaningful information; it is an under-specified phrase that fails to earn its place. It is not appropriately sized because it omits critical context.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (10 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is completely inadequate. It does not explain what the tool does, what inputs are used for, what it returns, or when to call it. An agent cannot correctly select or invoke this tool based on this description alone.

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 each parameter has its own description in the schema. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. According to the baseline rule for high schema coverage, a score of 3 is appropriate, though the cryptic description fails to connect parameters to the tool's purpose.

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

Purpose1/5

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

The description 'sdbm hex, input discarded' does not state a clear verb or resource. It is cryptic and gives no indication of what the tool actually does, nor does it distinguish it from the many sibling tools. The phrase 'sdbm hex' is not self-explanatory, and 'input discarded' suggests inputs are ignored but without context it's meaningless.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any conditions, alternatives, or exclusions. An agent has no way to know when sdbm-ok is appropriate compared to siblings like browser-url-ok, fetch-status, or web-fetch.

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

All sdbm hex, input discarded tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.