Resolve one TrustCarry Protocol v0.3 research claim by full identifier or three-digit sequence.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| claim_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds the identifier format detail but does not disclose other behavioral traits such as error handling or return behavior, which would add further value beyond annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single sentence that is front-loaded and contains no redundant information. Every word contributes to the understanding of the tool's purpose and parameter usage.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple get-style tool with one parameter and an output schema present, the description is sufficiently complete. It covers the key input requirement and relies on annotations for safety context, though it could mention behavior when the claim is not found for total completeness.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The schema only describes claim_id as a string with no additional description. The description compensates fully by specifying that the parameter accepts either a full identifier or a three-digit sequence, providing concrete guidance on valid input formats.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly specifies the tool's function: it resolves one TrustCarry Protocol v0.3 research claim using a full identifier or three-digit sequence. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_claim or search_research_claims by both the specific resource type and the identification method.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies the appropriate usage context: use when you have a claim's full identifier or three-digit sequence. It provides clear context for when the tool is applicable, though it does not explicitly mention alternative tools for cases when the identifier is unknown.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct resource or action: overviews, specific claims/papers, searches by different granularities, citation help, and document verification. No two tools overlap in purpose.
All tool names use lowercase snake_case with clear verb-noun or noun-preposition patterns (e.g., get_claim, search_papers, claim_layer_overview). The naming is uniform and predictable.
With 11 tools, the set covers the core operations for exploring a scholarly corpus without being excessive. Each tool serves a clear and necessary purpose.
The tools provide comprehensive coverage for discovering, retrieving, and verifying content from the corpus: overviews, searches at paper/claim/post level, direct retrieval, and document verification. No obvious missing operations for the intended use case.