Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ASTRA

ASTRA

by christophejlegros-lgtm
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Hybrid

orch_criterion

Read-onlyIdempotent

Computes Penrose objective-reduction criterion τ = ℏ/E_G for given tubulin count, with adjustable mass-displacement and sensitivity sweep across four orders of magnitude.

Instructions

Penrose objective-reduction criterion τ = ℏ/E_G, with the mass-displacement scale exposed as a free parameter and a sensitivity sweep across four orders of magnitude.

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": {
      "tubulinCount": "<tubulinCount>"
    },
    "name": "orch_criterion"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
massKgNoSuperposed unit mass. Default: tubulin dimer.
separationMNoEffective mass displacement, m. Default 1.056e-11 (back-calibrated to 2×10¹⁰ @ 25 ms).
tubulinCountYesTubulin dimers in coherent superposition.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv3.1.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond them: the mass-displacement scale is exposed as a free parameter and the tool performs a sweep across four orders of magnitude, meaning the invocation is not a single scalar evaluation. It stops short of describing the actual return shape.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single dense sentence with no filler, front-loaded on the criterion being computed and immediately followed by the two facts that distinguish the call (free parameter, sweep range). Every clause earns its place.

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 read-only three-parameter computation with no output schema, the description should at least hint at the return shape, and the 'sensitivity sweep' clause is the only clue that output is multi-valued rather than a single τ. The compute semantics are covered but the result contract and any domain caveats (e.g. interpretation of the back-calibrated separation default) are not.

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 all three parameters (massKg, separationM, tubulinCount) are already documented with defaults and bounds. The description's mention of a free mass-displacement scale maps loosely onto separationM but adds no format, units, or interaction detail beyond the schema — baseline score 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?

The description names a specific scientific quantity (Penrose objective-reduction criterion τ = ℏ/E_G) and states its distinctive behavior — a free mass-displacement scale plus a sensitivity sweep. That content clearly separates it from siblings such as orch_decoherence or orch_gate_config, but no sibling is named explicitly, and the verb is only implied by the nominal phrasing.

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 use this tool, no prerequisites, and no mention of the adjacent orch_decoherence/orch_cycle tools an agent might confuse it with. The agent must infer usage purely from the physics formula.

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