fairquery-llm-data-guard

Official

by fairquery

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Hybrid

List detectors and redaction styles (free)

list_detectors

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists supported PII and secret entity types, redaction styles, and billable pricing events so you can choose detection settings before scanning or redacting text with fairquery-llm-data-guard.

Instructions

WHAT: Static catalog of the PII and secret entity types guard_text can detect, the available redaction styles, and the billable pricing events. WHEN TO USE: before guard_text, to choose entityTypes / redactionStyle or to explain coverage to a user. WHEN NOT TO USE: to actually scan or redact text - use guard_text. COST: free; local, no network, no APIFY_TOKEN, deterministic. RETURNS: {pii: string[], secret: string[], redaction_styles: {style: example}, pricing_events: {event: unit}}. Takes no arguments. EXAMPLE: {} -> {"pii":["EMAIL","PHONE",...],"secret":["AWS_ACCESS_KEY",...],...}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`pii`	Yes	PII entity types (opt-in ones marked)
`secret`	Yes	Secret/credential entity types
`pricing_events`	Yes	Billable Apify event -> unit
`redaction_styles`	Yes	Redaction style -> example output

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 17, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, but the description adds value beyond them: cost (free), no network, no APIFY_TOKEN required, and deterministic output. It stops short of 5 only because return shape is largely restated from the existing output schema.

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?

Header-prefixed sections (WHAT/WHEN/COST/RETURNS/EXAMPLE) are scannable and front-loaded, with the routing rule stated in the first two blocks. Every sentence carries information; nothing is padded.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a free, argument-less catalog tool the definition covers purpose, routing, cost/auth requirements, return shape and an example. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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?

Zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 per the rubric. The description reinforces this by stating 'Takes no arguments' with an empty-object example, leaving no ambiguity for the caller.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (catalog of PII/secret entity types, redaction styles, pricing events) and explicitly scopes it as the static catalog that guard_text relies on. An agent can distinguish it from guard_text without opening either schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicit WHEN TO USE (before guard_text, to choose entityTypes/redactionStyle) and WHEN NOT TO USE (to actually scan or redact — use guard_text), naming the sibling as the alternative. Routing is unambiguous.

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

Deploy Server