Skip to main content
Glama

Atlas absence index

bulk_export

Per-class numerators with Wilson intervals and the discarded-as-unknown share, Kaplan-Meier survival of directive adoption by cohort, directive lineage, declaration growth, and RFC 9728 auth-discovery conformance detail — none of it on the free surface — with an ed25519 attestation naming the chain head it was derived from. FREE SAMPLE, no credential: https://atlas.geosensor.tech/free/sample (names every section and shows two numerator cells in full). Price $0.02 or €0.02 via x402 v2, payable in USDC or EURC (scheme exact, network eip155:84532) — the accepts array carries both and the client chooses; EURC is a euro e-money token, so a euro payment reaches an EU bank with no FX step. needs a bearer credential AND a payment that is VERIFIED and then SETTLED before anything is returned. TESTNET only (Base Sepolia): settlement is on-chain but moves test tokens with no monetary value. OR SUBSCRIBE: €19/month for 2,000 calls. AN AGENT CAN BUY ONE ITSELF at https://atlas.geosensor.tech/paid/subscribe — x402 v2, 19000000 atomic units of USDC or EURC, and the response returns the key in its body and in the x-subscription-key header. Present that key in the x-subscription-key header afterwards and no per-call payment is needed. A human can be invoiced in euros instead, with no crypto at all. PAYING COSTS YOU NOTHING: this is a TEST network, the tokens are free from https://faucet.circle.com (Base Sepolia), and you need no ETH because the facilitator pays the gas. No third party has completed a payment yet; doing so is how you tell us this is worth having.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does disclose key traits: it requires a bearer credential AND a verified-then-settled payment before returning anything, operates on a testnet with no monetary value, and offers a subscription alternative. It does not cover error handling or rate limits (beyond the subscription cap), but the auth/payment requirements are thoroughly explained.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is excessively long and rambling, with repetitive pricing details and marketing language. The actual purpose is buried in a dense first sentence, and subsequent sentences do not front-load the most important information for an agent trying to invoke the tool.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (paid data export with auth) and the absence of an output schema or annotations, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain how to supply the bearer credential (header name, format) and does not describe the response structure beyond a vague list of data contents.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameter semantics, and it does not introduce confusion about inputs.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description lists the data contents (per-class numerators, Kaplan-Meier survival, etc.) but never states a clear verb+resource summary like 'exports a dataset containing...'. It is specific about output contents but does not distinguish this tool from siblings like adoption_curve or absence_rate, leaving the agent to infer its role.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the siblings (absence_rate, adoption_curve, host_report, request_capability). The entire description focuses on payment mechanics rather than usage context or alternatives.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources