Skip to main content
Glama
felipebasurto

viajante

Runtime info

get_runtime_info
Read-onlyIdempotent

Check package, Python, and hotel schema versions offline before searches; confirms no network or personal paths are used.

Instructions

Offline executing package, Python and hotel schema versions.

Check before searches; an npm MCP does not upgrade a separate uv tool installation. May run during a search. No network or personal paths.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
statusYes
empty_noteYes
error_codeYes
observed_atYes
retry_afterYes
completenessYes
empty_reasonYes
observed_at_basisYes
retry_after_secondsYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.5.2
    • removedInput schema / title
      Removed value: -"get_runtime_infoArguments"
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "additionalProperties": true,
      +  "properties": {
      +    "completeness": {
      +      "enum": [
      +        "complete",
      +        "partial",
      +        "blocked"
      +      ],
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "empty_note": {
      +      "anyOf": [
      +        {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        {
      +          "type": "null"
      +        }
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "empty_reason": {
      +      "anyOf": [
      +        {
      +          "enum": [
      +            "provider_empty",
      +            "filtered_out",
      +            "not_loaded"
      +          ],
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        {
      +          "type": "null"
      +        }
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "error_code": {
      +      "anyOf": [
      +        {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        {
      +          "type": "null"
      +        }
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "observed_at": {
      +      "anyOf": [
      +        {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        {
      +          "type": "null"
      +        }
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "observed_at_basis": {
      +      "anyOf": [
      +        {
      +          "enum": [
      +            "provider",
      +            "fetch"
      +          ],
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        {
      +          "type": "null"
      +        }
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "retry_after": {
      +      "anyOf": [
      +        {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        {
      +          "type": "null"
      +        }
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "retry_after_seconds": {
      +      "anyOf": [
      +        {
      +          "type": "integer"
      +        },
      +        {
      +          "type": "null"
      +        }
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "status": {
      +      "enum": [
      +        "ok",
      +        "no_results",
      +        "rate_limited",
      +        "blocked",
      +        "timeout",
      +        "failed"
      +      ],
      +      "type": "string"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "required": [
      +    "status",
      +    "completeness",
      +    "empty_reason",
      +    "empty_note",
      +    "error_code",
      +    "retry_after",
      +    "retry_after_seconds",
      +    "observed_at",
      +    "observed_at_basis"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  2. Addedv1.4.1

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so the bar is lower; the description still adds two facts beyond them — "No personal paths" (no path leakage in the response) and "May run during a search" (concurrency safety). "No network" partially duplicates openWorldHint=false, so this is value-add rather than fully new coverage.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

It is short, and the resource list is front-loaded, but the terse telegraphic style leaves the middle sentence ("an npm MCP does not upgrade a separate uv tool installation") cryptic in isolation. Every sentence is relevant, yet the structure costs clarity that a few more words would have bought cheaply.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and there are no parameters to document. For a trivial zero-arg diagnostics call, the description supplies purpose, timing, and side-effect profile — everything needed to invoke it correctly, with only the interpretation of the version results left implicit.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 and there is nothing for the description to compensate for. No parameter semantics are needed or missing.

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 the exact resources returned — the executing package version, Python version, and hotel schema version — which pins the purpose despite the fragmentary, verb-less phrasing. It is clearly distinct from every sibling, which are all search/lookup/validation tools, though it never explicitly says so. An agent can tell what it gets without opening the output schema.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

"Check before searches" gives explicit timing guidance, and the npm/uv sentence explains why a version check matters (an npm-installed MCP won't upgrade a separate uv tool install). "May run during a search" also reassures that call placement is flexible. It stops short of saying what to do with the version output, but for a zero-arg diagnostic tool this is solid context.

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