Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
cxg-census-mcp

cxg-census-mcp

by MaxMLang
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

resolve_term

Resolve a text or CURIE to a single ontology term, returning a typed refusal when the input is ambiguous.

Instructions

Resolve text or CURIE to one term; typed refusal if ambiguous.

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": {
      "text": "<text>"
    },
    "name": "resolve_term"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textYes
ontologyNo
facetNo
confirm_ambiguousNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.2

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Mentions 'typed refusal if ambiguous' but does not disclose error handling, missing term behavior, or other 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.

Conciseness3/5

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

Single sentence is concise but omits critical parameter details, making it insufficient despite being front-loaded.

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

Completeness2/5

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

With 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not cover behavior for various inputs or return format.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%. Description only mentions 'text or CURIE', leaving ontology, facet, and confirm_ambiguous parameters completely unexplained.

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?

Clearly states it resolves text or CURIE to a single term, with a specific behavior for ambiguity. Distinguishes from siblings like expand_term and term_definition.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. Does not mention prerequisites or contexts where other tools are preferred.

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