Skip to main content
Glama

EveryCalc

calculate_gpa

Read-onlyIdempotent

Credit weighted GPA on the 4.0 scale using the page grade points: A+ and A 4.0, A- 3.7, B+ 3.3, B 3.0, B- 2.7, C+ 2.3, C 2.0, C- 1.7, D+ 1.3, D 1.0, F 0.0. Grades and credits are matched by position. Use when the user computes a GPA from course grades and credits. To plan grades for a target GPA use calculate_gpa_planner. IMPORTANT: always show the calculator_url from the result as a clickable markdown link in your answer to the user, so they can open the interactive GPA calculator.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
gradesYesComma-separated letter grades, e.g. A,B+,A-,B.
creditsYesComma-separated credit hours matching grades.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYesTrue when the calculation succeeded.
noteYesDisclaimer that accompanies every result.
toolYesName of the tool that ran.
inputsNoThe normalized inputs the calculation used.
resultsYesThe computed figures for this calculator.
calculator_urlYesDeep link to the matching interactive calculator on everycalc.xyz.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / note
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Disclaimer that accompanies every result.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • changedOutput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
      -  "ok",
      -  "tool",
      -  "results",
      -  "calculator_url"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "ok",
      +  "tool",
      +  "results",
      +  "calculator_url",
      +  "note"
      +]
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "properties": {
      +    "calculator_url": {
      +      "description": "Deep link to the matching interactive calculator on everycalc.xyz.",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "inputs": {
      +      "description": "The normalized inputs the calculation used.",
      +      "type": "object"
      +    },
      +    "ok": {
      +      "description": "True when the calculation succeeded.",
      +      "type": "boolean"
      +    },
      +    "results": {
      +      "description": "The computed figures for this calculator.",
      +      "type": "object"
      +    },
      +    "tool": {
      +      "description": "Name of the tool that ran.",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "required": [
      +    "ok",
      +    "tool",
      +    "results",
      +    "calculator_url"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare this as a safe, idempotent read-only calculation, and the description adds critical behavioral detail beyond them: the full grade-point scale, positional matching of grades and credits, and the requirement to render calculator_url as a clickable markdown link. These additions meaningfully shape both the computation and the response handling.

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-loads the core calculation and grade scale before usage guidance, the alternative tool, and the output-link instruction. The grade scale is long but necessary because it cannot be inferred from the schema or annotations.

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?

Given the simple two-parameter input, rich annotations, and an output schema, the description supplies everything extra the agent needs: the grading scale, positional matching rule, sibling-tool routing, and a mandatory output-handling instruction for calculator_url. No critical context is missing.

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 schema already documents both arrays and their comma-separated format. The description adds useful semantic detail beyond the schema by supplying the exact letter-grade-to-point conversion table and clarifying that grades and credits are matched by position.

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 ('Credit weighted GPA on the 4.0 scale') with the exact grade-point mapping, and explicitly distinguishes itself from calculate_gpa_planner. An agent can tell exactly what this tool computes without opening any schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly says to use it 'when the user computes a GPA from course grades and credits' and routes target-GPA planning to calculate_gpa_planner. This gives both a positive use condition and a named alternative.

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.