Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kanysh Basic

Kanysh Basic

by almukhanomr
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

grid_import

Imports a revision-pinned model manifest from a registered source into a project, handling Cartesian NPY/GRDECL properties or cornerpoint XTGeo geometry and returning a job ID.

Instructions

Import a revision-pinned model manifest from a registered source: Cartesian NPY/GRDECL properties, or cornerpoint.xtgeo.v1 geometry (GRDECL/EGRID/ROFF with COORD/ZCORN, ACTNUM and explicit property declarations). XTGeo geometry import needs full RAM and <=2M cells; later calculations use bounded CPU blocks. No native Petrel projects. Returns job_id.

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": "grid_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

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations it discloses the real cost model (full-RAM peak for XTGeo vs bounded CPU blocks later, 2M cell ceiling), the async nature ('Returns job_id'), and a format exclusion. It does not mention the idempotency_key behavior documented in the schema, nor retry/failure semantics, which would round out a mutation-style import.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and supported formats, then constraints, then the return value in one tight paragraph. Dense with domain jargon (COORD/ZCORN, ACTNUM, cornerpoint.xtgeo.v1) that is necessary but makes it slightly difficult to skim.

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 an async import that returns a job handle and has no output schema, the description covers formats, limits, and the return contract; annotations cover the safety profile. Missing only guidance on following up with job_status/job_logs and on failure/validation outcomes.

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 the baseline is 3; the description still earns a bump because 'revision-pinned' and the RAM/cell ceiling explain the intent behind file_revision and block_cells rather than restating them. It does not tie constraints to specific fields (e.g. which parameters the 2M cell limit binds), so it stays short of full compensation.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States a specific verb and resource ('Import a revision-pinned model manifest from a registered source') and enumerates the exact supported formats (Cartesian NPY/GRDECL, cornerpoint.xtgeo.v1 with COORD/ZCORN, ACTNUM, property declarations). It also carves out what it is not ('No native Petrel projects'), so the agent can distinguish it from the many sibling import tools without opening the schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives clear preconditions and exclusions: needs a registered source, XTGeo geometry requires full RAM and <=2M cells, Petrel projects unsupported. It never explicitly names an alternative sibling (e.g. eclipse_import, geodata_import) or says when to choose that over this, so routing among the importers is still partly inferred.

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