nds-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

nds_catalog

Catalog installed libraries and query entrypoints to locate nuclear physics data from multiple evaluated databases, identify where to query, and select the right tools.

Instructions

Catalog installed libraries and query entrypoints (what exists, where to query, and which tools to use).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "nds_catalog"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Aug 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It clarifies that the tool lists resources and directs to appropriate tools, but does not disclose output format, whether it scans local files or online sources, or any limitations. This is adequate but not rich in behavioral detail.

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 sentence, immediately front-loaded with the verb 'Catalog', and every phrase adds value. There is no redundancy or irrelevant detail.

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?

For a simple no-parameter catalog tool, the description covers the essential purpose and the type of information returned. It could be more explicit about the output structure, but given the lack of output schema, it is reasonably complete for an agent to understand the tool's role.

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 has zero parameters, and the schema is an empty object with 100% coverage. Baseline for no params is 4, and the description adds no parameter-specific details (as none exist), which is appropriate.

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?

The description uses a specific verb 'Catalog' with a clear resource: installed libraries and query entrypoints. The parenthetical explanation explicitly states what information is provided (existence, location, tool selection), which distinguishes it from sibling tools that query specific data.

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?

The description implies when to use this tool: to discover what libraries exist, where to query, and which tool to use. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, leaving some ambiguity for an agent deciding between this and other discovery tools like nds_schema or nds_info.

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