Skip to main content
Glama

QY Evolution Engine

by ltd.qianyuan
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

qy_capability

Capability lookup: who has which cap. Two-level routing (coarse class, then in-bucket ranking). Anonymous read. [新路径] 找人干活 / 找活干之前，先查能力档案：谁有哪个 cap（dry-run 得到候选与权重）。 两级路由：粗类（粗筛）→ 桶内细排。cap 值为裸词（真源实测），粗类 = cap 值本身（无动作段）。 传参三选一或并用：cap（裸词，与门面同名）/ caps（数组，同义）/ need（自然语言，只取命中粗类的词）。 返回：coarse / bound / count / candidates（node_ref · cap · weight · weight_source · rank）。未命中时返回 reason（no_query / no_coarse_match）。 匿名可读。不产出打分、不给 confidence（真源里没有的数一律不造）。

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
capNoSingle coarse-class bare word (same as facade ?cap=), e.g. "crawl". One of cap / caps / need must be given.
capsNoExact cap list, e.g. ["cite"]. If given, it decides the bucket.
needNoNatural-language need. Only the words matching a coarse class are used; nothing is guessed.
limitNoItems per bucket. Default 10, max 50.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / cap / description
      Previous value: -"单个粗类裸词（与门面 ?cap= 同名），如 \"crawl\""New value: +"Single coarse-class bare word (same as facade ?cap=), e.g. \"crawl\". One of cap / caps / need must be given."
    • changedInput schema / properties / caps / description
      Previous value: -"精确 cap 列表，如 [\"cite\"]"New value: +"Exact cap list, e.g. [\"cite\"]. If given, it decides the bucket."
    • changedInput schema / properties / limit / description
      Previous value: -"桶内条数，默认 10"New value: +"Items per bucket. Default 10, max 50."
    • changedInput schema / properties / need / description
      Previous value: -"自然语言需求（只取其中命中粗类的词，不猜不造）"New value: +"Natural-language need. Only the words matching a coarse class are used; nothing is guessed."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / cap
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "单个粗类裸词（与门面 ?cap= 同名），如 \"crawl\"",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden and does so well. It discloses anonymous read, dry-run behavior, no scoring/confidence, no fabrication of missing values, and the exact fallback reasons (no_query / no_coarse_match). This is unusually transparent about what the tool will and will not do.

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?

The description is dense but front-loaded with the core purpose, then systematically covers routing, parameters, return shape, and caveats. Some redundancy exists ('匿名可读' appears twice and two-level routing is stated twice), but overall each sentence adds operational value.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Despite having no output schema, the description names all return fields (coarse / bound / count / candidates with node_ref · cap · weight · weight_source · rank) and error reasons. It also covers parameter combination rules and the tool's no-fabrication policy, making it complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful semantics beyond the schema: the three parameters can be used alone or combined, 'cap' is a bare word matching the facade, and 'need' only uses words that hit a coarse class without guessing. This goes beyond the schema's individual property descriptions.

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?

The opening line 'Capability lookup: who has which cap' states a specific verb and resource, and the rest of the description elaborates on the lookup nature. It clearly distinguishes itself from the action-oriented sibling tools (qy_bid, qy_cancel, qy_publish) by framing this as a pre-work, dry-run capability check.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives clear context: use this before finding people or work ('找人干活 / 找活干之前，先查能力档案'). It also emphasizes anonymous read and dry-run semantics. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, so it stops short of a full when/when-not routing.

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

All QY Evolution Engine toolsInspect
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