Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Veynod

by io.github.veynod
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Clear Taint

clear_taint
Destructive

Clear a document's taint as a new version. People only: agents get 403.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "doc_key": "<doc_key>",
      "reason": "<reason>"
    },
    "name": "clear_taint"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
reasonYes
doc_keyYes
versionNo
namespaceNo
idempotency_keyNoOptional. Retries with the same key and arguments within 24 h replay the first result (replayed=true) without a second write; a different body with the same key is idempotency_key_reused.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, and the description adds real value on top: the operation produces a new version rather than mutating in place, and it is restricted to human callers (agents receive 403). What remains undisclosed is what "taint" means, whether prior versions are preserved, and whether the action is reversible.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two sentences, zero filler, with the core action front-loaded and the access constraint immediately after. Nothing in the text could be removed without losing information.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The presence of an output schema means return values need not be explained, and the annotations plus the access note cover safety and authorization. Still, for a destructive five-parameter mutation the definition leaves the central concept (taint) undefined and most parameters unexplained, which is a meaningful gap.

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 only 20% — only idempotency_key is documented in the schema — so the description must carry the burden for doc_key, reason, version, and namespace. It says nothing about any of them, including why a required "reason" exists or what supplying a version does, leaving four parameters with no semantics anywhere.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb and resource ("Clear a document's taint") plus a key outcome ("as a new version"), which is far more informative than the title. It does not name a sibling to distinguish from, though none of the siblings (restore_document, supersede_document) is obviously confusable, so the lack of explicit differentiation is minor.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

"People only: agents get 403" is a useful caller constraint that tells an agent it likely cannot use this tool at all. However, there is no guidance on when to clear taint versus restoring or superseding a document, and no prerequisites or workflow context are given.

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

All Veynod 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