Compare two values.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| a | Yes | First value | |
| b | Yes | Second value |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| a | Yes | ||
| b | Yes | ||
| type | Yes | ||
| equal | Yes | ||
| a_length | No | ||
| b_length | No | ||
| a_greater | No | ||
| b_greater | No | ||
| difference | No | ||
| equal_ignore_case | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Output schema / $defs / CompareResponseRemoved value: -{
- "properties": {
- "a": {
- "title": "A",
- "type": "string"
- },
- "a_greater": {
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "type": "boolean"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ],
- "title": "A Greater"
- },
- "a_length": {
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "type": "integer"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ],
- "title": "A Length"
- },
- "b": {
- "title": "B",
- "type": "string"
- },
- "b_greater": {
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "type": "boolean"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ],
- "title": "B Greater"
- },
- "b_length": {
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "type": "integer"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ],
- "title": "B Length"
- },
- "difference": {
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "type": "number"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ],
- "title": "Difference"
- },
- "equal": {
- "title": "Equal",
- "type": "boolean"
- },
- "equal_ignore_case": {
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "type": "boolean"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ],
- "title": "Equal Ignore Case"
- },
- "type": {
- "title": "Type",
- "type": "string"
- }
- },
- "required": [
- "a",
- "b",
- "type",
- "equal"
- ],
- "title": "CompareResponse",
- "type": "object"
-}Output schema / $defs / app__routers__misc_utils__CompareResponseAdded value: +{
+ "properties": {
+ "a": {
+ "title": "A",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "a_greater": {
+ "anyOf": [
+ {
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ {
+ "type": "null"
+ }
+ ],
+ "title": "A Greater"
+ },
+ "a_length": {
+ "anyOf": [
+ {
+ "type": "integer"
+ },
+ {
+ "type": "null"
+ }
+ ],
+ "title": "A Length"
+ },
+ "b": {
+ "title": "B",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "b_greater": {
+ "anyOf": [
+ {
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ {
+ "type": "null"
+ }
+ ],
+ "title": "B Greater"
+ },
+ "b_length": {
+ "anyOf": [
+ {
+ "type": "integer"
+ },
+ {
+ "type": "null"
+ }
+ ],
+ "title": "B Length"
+ },
+ "difference": {
+ "anyOf": [
+ {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ {
+ "type": "null"
+ }
+ ],
+ "title": "Difference"
+ },
+ "equal": {
+ "title": "Equal",
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ "equal_ignore_case": {
+ "anyOf": [
+ {
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ {
+ "type": "null"
+ }
+ ],
+ "title": "Equal Ignore Case"
+ },
+ "type": {
+ "title": "Type",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "a",
+ "b",
+ "type",
+ "equal"
+ ],
+ "title": "CompareResponse",
+ "type": "object"
+}Output schema / x-fastmcp-top-level-schemaPrevious value: -"CompareResponse"New value: +"app__routers__misc_utils__CompareResponse"Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'compare', implying a read-only operation, but there is no confirmation of side effects, return type, or edge cases. The description fails to add transparency beyond the minimal verb.
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?
At two words, the description is maximally concise. However, conciseness should not come at the cost of clarity; the description could be slightly expanded to improve purpose clarity without losing efficiency.
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 has a simple purpose and an output schema, so the description need not explain return values. However, given the lack of usage guidelines and behavioral transparency, the description feels incomplete for guiding an agent in selecting this tool among many comparison siblings.
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 coverage is 100%, and parameter descriptions ('First value', 'Second value') are self-explanatory. The tool description adds no additional semantic value beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 'Compare two values' specifies a verb ('compare') and a resource ('two values'), but 'values' is vague and does not distinguish from sibling tools like 'compare', 'compare_decimals', or 'compare_hashes'. It could be interpreted as general comparison, but the schema restricts inputs to strings, which is not clarified.
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?
No usage guidelines are provided. There is no mention of when to use this tool over alternatives such as 'compare' or 'compare_decimals', leaving the agent without decision support.
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.
Many tools have overlapping purposes, such as multiple random generators (random_integer, random_number), duplicate hashing functions (hash_md5, md5_checksum), and near-identical tools (compare, compare_2, compare_decimals). The sheer number of tools and lack of clear boundaries make it difficult for an agent to differentiate.
Naming is highly inconsistent. There are duplicate tools with different names (camel_case vs to_camel_case, slug vs slugify), arbitrary suffixes like '_2', and mixing of patterns (e.g., generate_password vs password_entropy). No clear convention is followed.
With 572 tools, the server is massively overpopulated for any coherent purpose. It includes trivial endpoints (true_endpoint, null, hello_world) and numerous duplicates, far exceeding a well-scoped utility set.
While the server covers many domains (math, strings, dates, colors, etc.), the presence of duplicate and trivial tools indicates a lack of thoughtful curation. There are gaps in basic operations (e.g., no dedicated file or network tools), and many tools are redundant.