Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kilonova MCP

Kilonova MCP

by MilnaOS
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

corpus_status

Display ingestion progress for a knowledge base topic by showing record counts, file size, and last modified time. Use it to monitor data loading and confirm completeness.

Instructions

Show ingestion progress for a topic — record counts, file size, last modified.

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": {
      "topic": "<topic>"
    },
    "name": "corpus_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
topicYesKB topic

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. 'Show' implies a read-only, non-mutating call and it discloses the returned fields, but it says nothing about permissions, whether an unknown topic errors or returns empty, or whether progress is live or a snapshot — meaningful gaps for a status tool.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the purpose and followed by the concrete payload, with zero redundant text. Nothing could be removed without losing information.

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 and no annotations, the description usefully enumerates the returned fields, which is exactly the missing piece for a simple one-parameter read tool. It stops short of covering failure modes or the freshness of the progress data, but is largely sufficient for correct invocation.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% with a single required 'topic' parameter, so the baseline is 3. The description only echoes 'for a topic' and adds no guidance on identifier format, case sensitivity, or whether the topic must already exist.

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 and resource: 'Show ingestion progress for a topic', and enumerates what is reported (record counts, file size, last modified). This clearly separates it from siblings like kb_load, kb_write and kb_search, though it never names an alternative explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied — an agent can infer this is for checking ingestion state, but there is no statement of when to prefer it over kb_topics (listing topics) or kb_schema, and no note about what to do if the topic doesn't exist or ingestion hasn't started.

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