Skip to main content
Glama
AhmedKishki

white-box-synthesis

by AhmedKishki

verify_synthesis

Verify synthesized passage preserves source human-ness by checking exact copies, logged deletions/reorderings, and flagged unverified transformations. Returns accepted, rejected, or gap status.

Instructions

Verify a white-box-synthesis derivation, or record a declared gap.

Checks that every character of the output traces to a declared operation on a declared source span. Does not check meaning: that is the human's job.

Args: passages: Source passages. Each needs id and text, and should carry a source citation label, which flows through to the report. output_context: What the output passage is meant to support. candidate: {"output": str, "operations": [...]}. Each operation needs type (COPY, INFLECT, NORMALISE, DELETE or ORDER), passage_id, text quoted verbatim from that passage, and occurrence (1-indexed). INFLECT and NORMALISE also need output_text, and INFLECT needs axis (tense, number, case, article or pronoun). DELETE and ORDER accept an optional note. gap: A typed gap when no legal derivation exists. Needs type (one of the six gap types), passage_id, argument_id, missing_requirement, authoritative_owner, question and resolution_paths. Submit exactly one of candidate or gap.

Returns: A report with an overall status of accepted, rejected or gap, a per-operation verdict of verified, unverified or failed, the reconstruction result, counts, and a compact provenance declaration. Operations marked unverified are recorded claims rather than checked facts, and any derivation containing one declares Human wording: Unverified.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
gapNo
passagesYes
candidateNo
output_contextYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states that the tool does not check meaning, that operations marked 'unverified' are recorded claims rather than checked facts, and that any derivation containing one declares 'Human wording: Unverified.' It also outlines the report statuses (accepted, rejected, gap). This provides substantial behavioral context, though it does not mention permissions, side effects, or whether the tool is read-only.

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 well-organized: a one-line summary followed by a structured Args section and a Returns section. It is longer than average but justified by the complexity of the parameters and the need to compensate for the sparse schema. Each sentence earns its place, and the most important information (purpose and scope) is front-loaded.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given the tool's complexity, the absence of annotations, and the 0% schema coverage, the description is remarkably complete. It covers all parameter requirements, the return format (report with statuses, per-operation verdicts, reconstruction result, counts, provenance declaration), and behavioral caveats. While it could benefit from concrete examples or edge-case handling, nothing critical is missing for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description is the sole source of parameter meaning. It thoroughly explains each parameter: passages need id, text, and a source label; output_context is described; candidate requires a structured object with operation types (COPY, INFLECT, NORMALISE, DELETE, ORDER) and their specific required fields; gap is defined with its six required fields. This adds comprehensive meaning far beyond the generic schema definitions.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Verify a white-box-synthesis derivation, or record a declared gap.' It clearly distinguishes between two modes (verification vs. gap recording) and leaves no ambiguity about the tool's core function. Since there are no sibling tools to differentiate, the purpose is fully clear.

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 explains the two usage scenarios: verify a derivation when one exists, or record a gap when no legal derivation exists. It also implies the context of use (white-box synthesis) and clarifies that meaning checking is left to humans. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or provide exclusion criteria, though no alternatives exist to compare against.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/AhmedKishki/mcp-white-box-synthesis'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server