ASTRA

orch_substrate

Read-onlyIdempotent

Returns an Orch OR verdict for a substrate by calculating tubulin budget and epochs elapsed per observation through ASTRA's channel, including reasoning.

Instructions

Orch OR verdict for one substrate: tubulin budget, epochs elapsed per observation through ASTRA's channel, and the reasoning behind the verdict.

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": {
      "substrate": "<substrate>"
    },
    "name": "orch_substrate"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`substrate`	Yes
`neuronCount`	No
`channelLatencyMs`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv3.1.0Sep 23, 2026

TDQS

B3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world, so safety is covered. The description adds useful output content (the verdict comprises a tubulin budget, per-observation epochs, and reasoning) but no output schema exists, and it does not explain what inputs drive the verdict or whether it is a pure computation.

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 that names the subject before enumerating outputs, with no filler. It is efficient, though the enumeration style leaves the reader with terminology (ASTRA, tubulin budget) that is never grounded.

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 usefully states what the verdict contains, which is its strongest contribution. However, it leaves all three parameters unexplained and gives no guidance on sibling selection, so a 3-parameter mutation-free tool still has clear informational gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden, yet it never mentions substrate, neuronCount, or channelLatencyMs. Only 'for one substrate' and 'through ASTRA's channel' hint obliquely at the substrate enum and latency input, leaving two of three parameters undocumented anywhere.

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 domain object (an Orch OR verdict for one substrate) and enumerates its components: tubulin budget, epochs elapsed per observation through ASTRA's channel, and reasoning. An agent can tell this is a verdict-producing tool rather than one of the sibling orch_* compute/config tools, though it never states whether the verdict is computed or retrieved.

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 guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as orch_decoherence, orch_criterion, or orch_report. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name and the sibling list.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server