Skip to main content
Glama

get_package5_proof

Public read-only legacy Package 5 telemetry snapshot. Reading it creates no participation or commercial state and it does not gate launch, execution, payment or settlement.

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": "get_package5_proof"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description does useful work by declaring this is read-only, creates no participation or commercial state, and does not gate launch, execution, payment, or settlement. It stops short of describing what the snapshot contains, whether 'legacy' implies stale or deprecated data, or how a caller should treat the result.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the resource description before the behavioral disclaimers. The second sentence is a long negation list, but each clause (participation state, gating of launch/execution/payment/settlement) carries distinct meaning for an agent assessing side effects.

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?

For a zero-parameter read with no output schema, the description should say what the snapshot returns or what 'Package 5' denotes. It covers the safety profile but leaves the return value entirely unexplained, which is the main remaining gap.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. The description correctly does not invent parameter semantics.

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?

The description identifies a specific resource – a legacy Package 5 telemetry snapshot – and marks it as public and read-only, which implicitly separates it from the per-user sibling get_my_package5_participation. However, the tool is named 'proof' while the description says 'telemetry snapshot', leaving a small mismatch about what is actually being retrieved.

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?

The description states what the tool does not do (no participation state, no gating) but never says when an agent should call it rather than get_my_package5_participation, get_live_utility, or get_economic_operation. No conditions, triggers, or alternatives are named.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.