Skip to main content
Glama

Max UUID constant

by io.github.sadri-dridi
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

wiki-title-ok

Check whether a Wikipedia title exists. Title discarded after the call.

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

C2.1/5.0
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. It adds one data-handling note ('Title discarded after the call'), but does not disclose whether the check performs a network request, whether it is read-only, what it returns, or how failures are reported. The 'discarded' phrasing hints at a validation-only tool but is not reconciled with the stated purpose.

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?

The description is very short and front-loaded with the main purpose. The second sentence is somewhat vague, but there is no fluff or unnecessary detail.

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?

For a tool with 10 optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, this description is severely incomplete. It does not explain which parameter carries the Wikipedia title, what the result looks like, when to use the tool, or how it relates to siblings, making correct invocation impossible.

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?

Although schema coverage is 100%, the tool description provides no mapping to parameters, and none of the 10 optional strings (city, zone, json, feed, host, path, website, etc.) is described as the Wikipedia title. The description therefore fails to help an agent decide which parameter to pass for the 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 states a specific operation ('Check whether a Wikipedia title exists'), but it is essentially a restatement of the tool name and is not actionable: the schema exposes 10 unrelated optional string parameters and no 'title' parameter. It also does not distinguish this tool from sibling 'ok'/'shape' checkers.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like browser-url-ok or file-path-ok. The description only implies a use case (verifying a Wikipedia title) but does not say how to select the tool or which parameter to provide.

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

All Max UUID constant 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