Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ctxvault

ctxvault

by Filippo-Venturini
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

warmup_status

Check whether the embedding model has finished initializing before running queries or writes.

Instructions

Check if the embedding model has finished initializing. Use this to verify warmup status before attempting queries or writes.

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": "warmup_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
readyYes
statusYes
messageYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.9.1

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Check' plus the note about verifying before queries/writes implies a read-only probe whose result gates other operations, which is useful context, but it does not state what happens when warmup is incomplete (error vs. blocking vs. degraded results) or whether calling it has any side effects.

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?

Two short sentences with the purpose front-loaded and the usage condition immediately following. Every clause carries information; nothing is redundant.

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?

For a zero-parameter readiness check with an output schema already documenting the return shape, the description covers what is needed to call it correctly. The only gap is guidance on how to interpret or act on a negative result, which the output schema partially mitigates.

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 semantics to explain and the baseline of 4 applies. The empty object schema is consistent with the description's framing as a simple status probe.

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?

States a specific verb ('Check') and a specific resource ('embedding model has finished initializing'), which is unambiguous against siblings like query or write_doc. It stops short of explicitly naming a sibling alternative, but the operation is distinct enough that an agent can select it confidently.

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?

Explicitly says when to use it: 'before attempting queries or writes.' That gives a clear trigger condition tied to the sibling operations. No when-not-to-use guidance or fallback behavior is given, but for a zero-parameter readiness probe there is little ambiguity.

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