Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
CP Brand MCP

CP Brand MCP

Official
by Consumer-Choice-Center
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

audit_brand_assets

Read-only

Validate that CP logos, references, and installed fonts match exact hashes and identities, preventing fallback font substitutions.

Instructions

Check hashes of supplied CP logos and references, and exact installed font identities. No fallback fonts.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "audit_brand_assets"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.1

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The verb 'Check' indicates a read-only operation, and the annotation confirms readOnlyHint=true. The additional detail 'No fallback fonts' provides behavioral context beyond the annotation, without contradiction.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, short sentence that conveys the essential scope and constraints. Every word contributes meaning without redundancy.

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?

The description explains what the tool does but does not mention the output format or return value. However, given the simple check nature and lack of output schema, the description is mostly sufficient; a slight gap remains in explaining expected results.

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?

There are no parameters in the schema, so the description has nothing to add. The schema coverage is 100% and no parameter-level elaboration is needed.

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 description states a specific verb ('Check') and specifies the objects (hashes of supplied CP logos and references, exact installed font identities) clearly. It also notes the important constraint 'No fallback fonts.'

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus sibling tools. It implies a read-audit purpose but lacks direct guidance on selection criteria.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools