Skip to main content
Glama

simulate_heavy_computation

Execute multiple heavy computation tasks concurrently to demonstrate parallel processing benefits for SEO data analysis operations.

Instructions

Parallelized version of simulate_heavy_computation.

This function accepts a list of keyword argument dictionaries and executes simulate_heavy_computation concurrently for each set of arguments.

Original function signature: simulate_heavy_computation(complexity: int)

Args: kwargs_list (List[Dict[str, Any]]): A list of dictionaries, where each dictionary provides the keyword arguments for a single call to simulate_heavy_computation.

Returns: List[Any]: A list containing the results of each call to simulate_heavy_computation, in the same order as the input kwargs_list.

Original docstring: Simulate a heavy computation task.

This tool demonstrates parallelization benefits by performing
a computationally intensive task that can be parallelized.

Args:
    complexity: Complexity level (1-10, higher = more computation)
    
Returns:
    Dictionary containing computation results

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kwargs_listYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • The core handler function implementing the simulate_heavy_computation tool. It performs a simulated heavy computation loop based on the complexity parameter, yielding control periodically for async compatibility, and returns performance metrics.
    async def simulate_heavy_computation(complexity: int = 5) -> Dict[str, Any]:
        """Simulate a heavy computation task.
        
        This tool demonstrates parallelization benefits by performing
        a computationally intensive task that can be parallelized.
        
        Args:
            complexity: Complexity level (1-10, higher = more computation)
            
        Returns:
            Dictionary containing computation results
        """
        if complexity < 1 or complexity > 10:
            raise ValueError("complexity must be between 1 and 10")
        
        start_time = time.time()
        
        # Simulate heavy computation
        result = 0
        iterations = complexity * 100000  # Reduced for async context
        
        for i in range(iterations):
            result += i * 2
            if i % 10000 == 0:
                # Yield control to allow other tasks to run
                import asyncio
                await asyncio.sleep(0.001)
        
        computation_time = time.time() - start_time
        
        return {
            "complexity": complexity,
            "iterations": iterations,
            "result": result,
            "computation_time": computation_time,
            "operations_per_second": iterations / computation_time if computation_time > 0 else 0
        }
  • The registration code for parallel tools, including simulate_heavy_computation. It applies SAAGA decorators (parallelize, tool_logger, exception_handler) and registers the decorated function with the MCP server using mcp_server.tool(name=tool_name).
    for tool_func in parallel_example_tools:
        # Apply SAAGA decorator chain: exception_handler → tool_logger → parallelize
        decorated_func = exception_handler(tool_logger(parallelize(tool_func), config.__dict__))
        
        # Extract metadata
        tool_name = tool_func.__name__
        
        # Register directly with MCP
        mcp_server.tool(
            name=tool_name
        )(decorated_func)
        
        unified_logger.info(f"Registered parallel tool: {tool_name}")
  • The list grouping simulate_heavy_computation as a parallel tool, which is imported and used in server/app.py for registration.
    parallel_example_tools = [
        process_batch_data,
        simulate_heavy_computation
Behavior2/5

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 mentions 'parallelized' and 'concurrently,' which hints at performance benefits, but lacks details on behavioral traits like error handling, resource usage, rate limits, or whether it's read-only/destructive. The original docstring included in the description adds some context about simulating heavy computation, but overall disclosure is minimal for a tool with potential computational impacts.

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?

The description is moderately concise but includes redundant elements like the original docstring, which repeats information. It's front-loaded with key points but could be more streamlined by integrating the original details more efficiently without duplication.

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 the complexity (parallel computation tool), no annotations, and an output schema exists (implied by 'Has output schema: true'), the description is fairly complete. It covers purpose, parameters, and returns, but lacks behavioral context like performance implications or error handling, which would be beneficial for a tool of this nature.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description compensates well by explaining that 'kwargs_list' is a list of dictionaries where each provides keyword arguments for the original function, and it references the original signature with 'complexity: int.' This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema, though it doesn't fully detail all possible keyword arguments or their constraints.

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 clearly states this is a 'parallelized version' that 'executes simulate_heavy_computation concurrently for each set of arguments,' which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes itself from the original function but doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'process_batch_data' or 'calculate_fibonacci,' which might also involve computation.

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?

The description implies usage for parallelizing multiple calls to the original function, but doesn't explicitly state when to use this vs. alternatives like the original function or other sibling tools. No exclusions or specific contexts are provided, leaving usage somewhat ambiguous.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/SAGAAIDEV/mcp-ahrefs'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server