Skip to main content
Glama
SVerITG

Metis

by SVerITG
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Metis — Citation Debt

citation_debt

Lists outputs whose citations were never verified, returning counts by verdict and the worst offenders first, optionally scoped to a single artifact path.

Instructions

Which outputs rest on citations that were never verified?

Reads the ledger. This is the question the AI in Public Health course raised
and nothing could answer — 16 lessons shipped with "every citation is an
unverified lead" because verification results had nowhere to accumulate.

Args:
    limit: Maximum rows to list (default 25).
    artifact: Restrict to one artifact path; omit for everything.

Returns:
    Counts by verdict, and the worst offenders first.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
artifactNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.1.5

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations, so the description carries the full burden. 'Reads the ledger' implies a non-mutating operation and the return shape is described (counts by verdict, worst offenders first), but permissions, side effects, and what the ledger draws from are left implicit.

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 rhetorical question and the '16 lessons shipped' backstory take up front-loaded space without operational content, so the definition is not front-loaded on what the tool does. The Args and Returns blocks themselves are tight and well-formed.

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 an output schema present and both parameters explained, an agent has what it needs to call this correctly; the description appropriately stops short of re-specifying return fields. Only the relationship to verification tools is missing.

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 coverage is 0%, yet the description documents both parameters meaningfully: limit as a row cap with default, and artifact as an optional path filter where omission means everything. That compensates well for the bare schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The opening question plus 'Reads the ledger' conveys the gist — surfacing outputs whose citations were never verified — but the actual operation is never stated as a verb+resource (e.g., 'list citation-verification debt records'). Sibling tools like verify_text_citations, verify_doi, and library_coverage overlap in domain, and nothing distinguishes this one from them.

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 when-to-use guidance and no routing to alternatives such as verify_text_citations or library_coverage. The reader must infer that this is a retrospective audit query rather than the tool that performs verification.

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