Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kanysh Basic

Kanysh Basic

by almukhanomr
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

geodata_import

Imports Petrel/RMS surfaces and well data using explicit units, CRS, datum, and column mappings, then returns a canonical Parquet dataset with source hash and report.

Instructions

Import Petrel/RMS exchanged surfaces (IRAP ASCII/binary, ZMAP+, CPS-3 ASCII), RMS well ASCII or explicitly mapped Petrel ASCII trajectories/tops/polygons using XTGeo. User declares units/Z direction/CRS/datum and ASCII mappings; no automatic coordinate or survey interpretation. CPS-3 requires explicit sample order/Y direction. Returns dataset with source hash, canonical Parquet and report; optional trajectory locates MD-only tops for scene display.

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": {
      "request": "<request>"
    },
    "name": "geodata_import"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
requestYesTool arguments object (all fields documented; Z is positive upward).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only say it is a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent write, so the description must carry the rest — and it does, disclosing that the tool returns a dataset with source hash, canonical Parquet and a report, and that nothing is auto-interpreted. It could have said more about what happens on validation failure or why idempotentHint is false despite an idempotency_key parameter.

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?

Four dense sentences, front-loaded with what gets imported and which formats are accepted, then requirements, then the return shape. Nothing is filler, though the format enumeration and the constraint clause make the opening sentence long enough to be hard to scan.

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

Completeness5/5

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

There is no output schema, so the description must cover returns — it does (dataset, source hash, canonical Parquet, report, trajectory-based MD-only tops for scene display). Combined with the declaration requirements and the no-inference warning, an agent has what it needs to call this correctly.

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 100%, so 3 is the baseline; the description still adds cross-parameter meaning by framing CRS/units/Z/datum as user-declared (never inferred) and by calling out that CPS-3 requires an explicit sample order and Y direction, tying cps_order/cps_y_first together. It also explains the purpose of the optional trajectory reference (locating MD-only tops).

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 (import geological surfaces/well data) and enumerates the exact formats handled (IRAP ASCII/binary, ZMAP+, CPS-3, RMS well ASCII, mapped Petrel ASCII), which implicitly separates it from eclipse_import, grid_import and seismic_import. It never names a sibling or an explicit exclusion, so differentiation is inferential rather than stated.

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 makes the operating conditions clear (user must declare units/Z direction/CRS/datum and ASCII mappings; no automatic coordinate or survey interpretation; CPS-3 needs explicit sample order/Y direction), which tells an agent what it must supply. It gives no when-to-use/when-not guidance relative to the many import siblings, leaving the choice to inference.

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