Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kanysh Basic

Kanysh Basic

by almukhanomr
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

result_validate

Run independent numerical validation checks on a project artifact in an isolated worker; get a job_id and validation artifact to confirm required supported checks pass, not geological fitness.

Instructions

Independent checks in isolated worker; returns job_id and then validation artifact. PASS applies only to required supported numerical checks, not geological fitness.

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": "result_validate"
  }
}

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

B3.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Adds real value beyond annotations: the operation is asynchronous (returns a job_id before the validation artifact) and runs in an isolated worker, and the description warns that a PASS verdict is narrow. Annotations only say it's non-read-only, non-idempotent, non-destructive; they don't convey the two-phase job flow or verdict semantics, which are exactly the traps an agent would hit.

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 sentences, no waste, with the async/job_id behavior front-loaded. It is arguably too terse given the execution-policy surface, but nothing present is filler.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Covers the async contract and verdict caveat, which are the key non-schema facts. It leaves out what the agent does next (poll job_status, then artifact_inspect), what artifact kinds are accepted, and any failure/retry framing, which matters for a non-idempotent job-starting tool with no output schema.

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 description coverage is 100% with a single nested request object whose fields (artifact id/revision, execution policy, idempotency_key) are all documented inline. The description contributes nothing parameter-specific; the baseline 3 applies.

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 action (independent checks in an isolated worker) on a specific resource (a result artifact), and names the return shape (job_id then validation artifact). It doesn't explicitly distinguish itself from the cluster of sibling validators (plan_validate, dataset_validate, simulation_validate, workflow_validate), so the agent must infer the target scope.

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 statement of when to call this versus the other *_validate siblings or when not to call it. The only scoping sentence ('PASS applies only to required supported numerical checks, not geological fitness') constrains what the verdict means, not when to invoke the tool.

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