GunSpec

Compare loads downrange

gunspec_load_compare

Read-onlyIdempotent

Workflow. Compares the ammunition loads for one cartridge fired from the same barrel, in a single call. Returns velocity, energy and drop at each distance for every load, ranked by energy at the farthest distance. The flattest and hardest-hitting loads are identified. Provide the caliber slug (use gunspec_cartridge_profile or gunspec_list_calibers to find it) and, optionally, a barrel length, distances, a bullet type and the number of loads. Replaces one ammunition list call plus one ballistics call per load.

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": {
      "caliber_id": "<caliber_id>"
    },
    "name": "gunspec_load_compare"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Number of loads to compare, from 1 to 8.
`distances`	No	Distances in metres. Defaults to 0, 100, 200 and 300.
`caliber_id`	Yes	The caliber slug, e.g. "9x19mm-parabellum".
`bullet_type`	No	Return only loads of this bullet type, e.g. "JHP" or "FMJ".
`barrel_length_mm`	No	Barrel length for every load, in mm (50 to 2000). Omit for each load's reference barrel.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedSep 18, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds real value beyond annotations by disclosing that this is a compound 'Workflow' operation making multiple internal calls, and by specifying the ranking behavior (by energy at the farthest distance). No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Single paragraph with the core purpose front-loaded ('Compares the ammunition loads...') and the workflow flag at the very start. Every sentence carries information — output, ranking, parameter guidance, and efficiency note — with no filler, though it runs slightly long.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With no output schema, the description compensates by explaining the return values (velocity, energy, drop, ranking) and the ranking rule. It covers the five parameters, defaults, and how to source the required caliber_id. A complete-enough definition for a read-only workflow tool given the annotation coverage.

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 coverage is 100% — all five parameters have inline descriptions. The description reinforces which parameters matter and adds the helpful cross-reference on how to obtain the caliber slug, but it does not add syntax or format details beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema already documents each parameter.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States a specific verb and resource ('compares the ammunition loads for one cartridge fired from the same barrel') with precise output semantics (velocity, energy, drop, ranked by energy at the farthest distance). It also distinguishes itself from siblings by framing itself as a workflow that replaces an ammunition list call plus one ballistics call per load.

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?

The description names two sibling tools (gunspec_cartridge_profile or gunspec_list_calibers) for finding the caliber slug and notes the efficiency gain over separate list+ballistics calls. However, it never explicitly states when NOT to use this tool versus gunspec_ammunition_ballistics or gunspec_list_ammunition — the contrast is implied rather than stated as a clear alternative rule.

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

All GunSpec tools Inspect

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

Need Help?