Skip to main content
Glama
cornelcroi

French Tax MCP Server

by cornelcroi

health_check

Verify the French Tax MCP Server is responsive and operational to ensure tax calculations can be processed accurately.

Instructions

Simple health check to verify the server is responsive

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ctxNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • Registration of the 'health_check' tool using the @mcp.tool decorator.
    @mcp.tool(
        name="health_check",
        description="Simple health check to verify the server is responsive",
    )
  • Handler function for the 'health_check' tool. Performs a simple health check, logs if context provided, and returns server status including available tools list.
    async def health_check(ctx: Optional[Context] = None) -> Dict:
        """Simple health check to verify the server is responsive.
        
        Returns:
            Dict: Status information about the server
        """
        if ctx:
            await ctx.info("Health check requested")
        
        return {
            "status": "success",
            "message": "French Tax MCP Server is running",
            "timestamp": datetime.now().isoformat(),
            "available_tools": [
                "calculate_income_tax",
                "get_tax_brackets", 
                "get_scheme_details",
                "calculate_pinel_benefit",
                "calculate_lmnp_benefit"
            ]
        }
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions the tool is a 'simple health check' which implies a read-only, non-destructive operation, but doesn't explicitly state this. It doesn't describe response format, error conditions, rate limits, or authentication requirements that would be helpful for behavioral understanding.

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?

The description is a single, clear sentence that gets straight to the point. It's appropriately sized for a simple health check tool with no wasted words or unnecessary elaboration.

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 simple health check tool with an output schema (which presumably documents the response), the description is reasonably complete. However, it lacks information about what 'responsive' means, what constitutes a successful check, or what the tool actually tests. The presence of an output schema helps, but more behavioral context would be beneficial.

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?

With only one optional parameter (ctx) that has 0% schema description coverage, the description doesn't mention parameters at all. However, since this is a health check tool that likely needs no parameters to function, and the single parameter appears to be an optional context injection mechanism, the baseline of 4 is appropriate for a tool that effectively has zero required operational parameters.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Simple health check to verify the server is responsive.' It uses specific verbs ('check', 'verify') and identifies the resource ('server'). However, it doesn't distinguish from siblings since this appears to be the only health-related tool among tax-focused siblings.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, timing considerations, or relationships to other tools. The agent must infer usage from the purpose alone.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/cornelcroi/french-tax-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server