Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Systemores Cloud MCP Server

Systemores Cloud MCP Server

by bobcar0
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Hybrid

Generate Synthetic IPIP-NEO-120 Persona Cohort

systemores_generate_cohort
Read-only

Generate statistical cohorts of synthetic user personas across operational domains, with psychometric profiles, demographic diversity, and optional adversarial prompt-injection payloads.

Instructions

Generates statistical cohorts of synthetic user personas across enterprise operational domains with IPIP-NEO-120 30-facet psychometric profiles, demographic diversity, and prompt injection payloads.

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": {
      "domain": "<domain>"
    },
    "name": "systemores_generate_cohort"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainYesThe operational domain for persona generation.
cohortSizeNoNumber of synthetic personas to generate (1–100).
includeAdversarialNoIncludes prompt-injection and noisy data submitter personas in the cohort.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.3

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true and idempotentHint=false. The description adds real value beyond them by disclosing that output includes prompt-injection payloads and psychometric/demographic content, but it does not explain why the call is non-idempotent (fresh random cohorts per call) or any resource cost, which would help the agent understand behavior.

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 front-loaded sentence with the verb and resource leading and no redundant restatement of the title. It is dense but each clause (domains, psychometric profiles, demographic diversity, injection payloads) carries distinct information.

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?

For a non-idempotent generative tool with no output schema, the description should at least hint at the structure of a returned persona/cohort and the implication of randomized results across calls. It conveys the content dimensions well but leaves the return shape and repeat-call behavior unexplained.

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%, so domain, cohortSize and includeAdversarial are fully documented in the schema. The description's mention of "prompt injection payloads" loosely maps to includeAdversarial but adds no syntax, defaults, or range detail beyond the schema, so 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 verb ("Generates") and a well-defined resource ("statistical cohorts of synthetic user personas") qualified by IPIP-NEO-120 30-facet psychometric profiles and demographic diversity. An agent can tell this is the only generation/cohort-creation tool among audit/analyze/stress-test siblings, but the description never explicitly contrasts itself with them.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance; the phrase "across enterprise operational domains" only implies the domain context already covered by the enum. No alternatives or prerequisites are mentioned, leaving invocation timing entirely 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