Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
hicar-mcp

hicar-mcp

Official
by HICAR-Model
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

explain_namelist

Parses a namelist and annotates each option with its description, type, default, and allowed values while flagging validation issues.

Instructions

Parse a namelist and annotate every option with its description, type, default and allowed values; flag any validation issues.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "content": "<content>"
    },
    "name": "explain_namelist"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contentYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool parses, annotates each option, and flags validation issues. This is sufficient for a simple parsing tool; no hidden destructive behavior is expected.

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 sentence that covers the core functionality without any fluff. Every word adds value.

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 one parameter and no output schema, the description explains both input and output clearly. It could mention the expected format of the content (e.g., Fortran namelist), but the tool name and context make it understandable.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description adds meaning: the single 'content' parameter is a namelist to parse. It tells the agent what the parameter represents, compensating for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 clearly states the action (parse and annotate) and the output (descriptions, types, defaults, allowed values, validation issues). It distinguishes from siblings like validate_namelist (which only validates) and get_namelist_option (which gets a single option).

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. However, from context and sibling tools, it is implied that this tool is for understanding a namelist's options in detail. No alternatives are mentioned.

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