Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
DeskCalc Verify

DeskCalc Verify

Official
by DeskCalc
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

DeskCalc status

deskcalc_status
Read-onlyIdempotent

Checks whether DeskCalc is installed, reports its location, and indicates whether a verification session is open so users know if verification can proceed.

Instructions

Whether DeskCalc is installed and where, and whether a verification is open.

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": "deskcalc_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive, and closed-world, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds the useful content signal that the result reports installation location and open-verification state, but says nothing about freshness, caching, or what happens when DeskCalc is absent.

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?

A single compact sentence with no filler, and the two returned facts are presented together up front. The sentence fragment construction is slightly awkward but costs no clarity.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing return content, and it does so at a high level for a simple zero-parameter tool. It is nearly complete; only the shape of the response (fields, error case when not installed) is left unstated.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter meaning for the description to supply. Baseline for a no-param tool applies, and nothing here misleads about inputs.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description names the resource (DeskCalc) and specifies the two facts returned: installation presence/location and whether a verification is currently open. That distinguishes it reasonably well from get_verification and verify_numbers, though it is phrased as a noun fragment rather than a verb-led statement of what the tool does.

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 explicit guidance on when to call this versus siblings like get_verification or verify_numbers, nor any stated prerequisite or exclusion. The only hint is implicit — that it is a pre-flight status check — leaving the agent to infer its place in the workflow.

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