Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-parigp

mcp-parigp

by daedalus
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

pollegendre

Compute the nth Legendre polynomial, specifying the variable name.

Instructions

Compute the nth Legendre polynomial.

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": {
      "n": "<n>"
    },
    "name": "pollegendre"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nYesNon-negative integer.
vNoVariable name (default 'x').x

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, and the description only states the computation without disclosing side effects, error conditions, or return format. For a pure mathematical tool, transparency is minimal.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with no unnecessary words. It is concise but lacks some potentially helpful context, though it does not waste space.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Without an output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns (e.g., polynomial coefficients or expression). It does not, leaving ambiguity despite the simple nature.

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%, so both parameters are already documented. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline.

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 it computes the nth Legendre polynomial, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from the sibling 'legendre' tool (Legendre symbol) by specifying 'polynomial'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like polchebyshev, polhermite, or other polynomial tools. The description does not mention use cases or exclusions.

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