Convert between angle units: degree, radian, gradian, turn.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| to | Yes | Target unit. | |
| from | Yes | Source unit. | |
| value | Yes | Angle value to convert. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| to | Yes | Target unit, echoed back. | |
| from | Yes | Source unit, echoed back. | |
| value | Yes | Input value, echoed back. | |
| result | Yes | Converted value in the target unit. |
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=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the tool's safety profile. The description adds no further behavioral context such as return format, precision, or edge-case handling; it only restates the purpose, providing no additional transparency beyond the 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 lists the action and supported units. Every word is informative, with no filler or repetition, and it is appropriately front-loaded.
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?
The tool is a simple converter with complete schema documentation and an output schema. The description plus annotations and schema fully cover what an agent needs to invoke it correctly, so no additional context is required.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100%, with clear descriptions for value, from, and to, including enums for source and target units. The description adds no parameter-specific semantics, so the baseline of 3 applies.
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 states the tool converts between angle units and enumerates the supported units (degree, radian, gradian, turn), which distinguishes it from sibling converters like length-converter or temperature-converter. The verb 'convert' and resource 'angle units' are specific and unambiguous.
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 implicitly defines when to use this tool by naming angle units as the conversion domain, making the context clear. It does not explicitly provide exclusions or alternatives, but given the sibling tool names, the intended use is obvious.
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.
Most tools have distinct purposes. However, 'hex-to-rgb' is redundant with 'color-converter', which already handles hex-to-RGB conversion, causing potential confusion.
Names follow a consistent lowercase-with-hyphens style, but vary in pattern (e.g., 'angle-converter', 'average-calculator', 'dedup-lines'). One tool ('internal-do-not-call') deviates from the descriptive norm.
With 46 tools, the server is heavily populated. Many converters could be merged into a generic unit converter, and there is redundancy, making the surface unnecessarily large for a single server.
The server covers a broad range of utility domains: converters, text processing, math, cryptography, etc. Minor redundancies exist (e.g., hex-to-rgb vs color-converter), but the set is otherwise comprehensive.
