Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
hackyeaster-solver

hackyeaster-solver

by cloudwarriors-ai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

he_validate_flag

Validates whether a given text matches the HackyEaster flag format he20XX{...}.

Instructions

Check if a string matches the HackyEaster flag format (he20XX{...}).

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": {
      "text": "<text>"
    },
    "name": "he_validate_flag"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textYesText to check for flag format

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided; description only states what it checks, not behavioral details like return value or side effects. For a validation tool, more context is needed.

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?

Single concise sentence with no unnecessary words, perfectly front-loaded.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given tool simplicity (one param, no output schema), description is adequate, though it could mention return type or purpose of validation.

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 coverage is 100% with a clear description; tool description adds no new parameter information beyond what the schema provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states the action (check) and resource (string matching flag format). It distinguishes from siblings like he_submit_flag and he_hash.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied by name and description, but no explicit guidance on when to use vs. alternatives like he_submit_flag.

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