fip-mcp

profile

Retrieve a community’s agreed FAIR implementation choices question by question from its current FIP version, follow supersedes chains, and flag open questions as gaps.

Instructions

The community's FAIR choices, question by question, from the LATEST version of its FIP (the supersedes chain is followed and returned as versionChain).

noChoice: true means the community left that question open. Treat it as a gap in the profile, not as permission to pick something yourself.

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": {
      "community": "<community>"
    },
    "name": "profile"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`community`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 12, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden and does disclose substantive behavior: the latest version is resolved by following the supersedes chain, `versionChain` is returned, and open questions surface as `noChoice: true` with an instruction on how to treat them. It omits error behavior for an unknown community and any indication of read-only/safety profile, which keeps it short of a 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

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

Two short, front-loaded sentences with no filler, and the `noChoice` caveat is separated clearly. Minor cost: backticked identifiers and references to `versionChain` presume a return shape that is never otherwise established.

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?

For a single-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the meaningful semantics: scope, version resolution, and the null-choice edge case. Remaining gaps are the input format for `community` and behavior on an unrecognized community, both moderate rather than blocking.

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 0% for the single `community` parameter, so the description would need to compensate for format (ID, slug, or name) and it does not. The parameter's role is nonetheless inferable from the framing 'The community's FAIR choices', so the gap is narrow rather than fatal.

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 states a specific resource and behavior: retrieving a community's FAIR choices question by question from the latest FIP version, with the supersedes chain resolved. It is clear what the tool returns, though it does not name or contrast any sibling (e.g. check, crosswalk, recommend) to help an agent distinguish cases.

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?

Use is only implied: the tool is for reading a community's FAIR profile. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer it over siblings or what prerequisites exist. The one piece of real guidance is interpretive — that `noChoice: true` marks a gap and must not be filled in by the agent — which is valuable but addresses output handling rather than tool selection.

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

Deploy Server