Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
VeritasGraph

VeritasGraph

by bibinprathap
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

veritasgraph_compile_status

Check the last ontology compile run and count open curation suggestions to monitor graph readiness and prioritize review work.

Instructions

Last ontology compile run and the number of open curation suggestions.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "veritasgraph_compile_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.2.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full disclosure burden and it provides almost none: it does not state that the call is read-only, that it does not itself trigger a compile, how often compiles run, or what 'open' means for suggestions. For a zero-param status endpoint the behavior is low-risk, but the trigger-vs-observe ambiguity is left unresolved.

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?

A single short sentence with no padding, and the two returned facts are listed compactly. It could be strengthened by front-loading an explicit verb such as 'Reports' so the agent reads the intent immediately.

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?

With no output schema, the description must convey return content, and it only lists two items without indicating what 'compile run' includes (timestamp, success/failure, error details) or the shape of the suggestion count. It is adequate to identify the tool but thin for an agent that needs to interpret the result.

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?

The tool takes no parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. The empty schema is consistent with the description implying a global status read.

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?

Names a specific resource (the last ontology compile run) plus a second metric (open curation suggestion count), which distinguishes it from siblings like get_ontology or get_graph that return ontology content rather than run health. It lacks an explicit verb and is written as a noun phrase, but the subject matter is unambiguous.

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?

There is no statement of when to call this versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. An agent must infer that this is a health/status check, and nothing tells it whether to use this before or after get_ontology, import_graph, or propose_term.

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