IIT Roorkee Academics MCP

Get AIS Screen URL

ais_get_portal_route

Read-only

Generate a shareable dashboard URL for any cataloged AIS screen. Recipients log in with their own permissions to view.

Instructions

Return the shareable dashboard URL for a cataloged AIS screen. The recipient must log in with their own permissions.

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": {
      "route": "<route>"
    },
    "name": "ais_get_portal_route"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`route`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jul 10, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the tool is safely read-only. The description adds that the URL is not pre-authenticated, which is useful behavioral context. However, it does not disclose other potential behaviors like time-limitations or error conditions.

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?

Two concise sentences clearly separated by purpose and constraint. No fluff, front-loaded with the core action.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate but minimal. It explains the result and a key constraint, but could better describe the input parameter and output format.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It only loosely mentions 'cataloged AIS screen' but does not clarify what the 'route' parameter represents (e.g., an ID, a path) or its expected format.

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 clearly states the tool returns a shareable dashboard URL for a cataloged AIS screen, using specific verbs and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like ais_list_external_portals by focusing on cataloged AIS screens.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description provides some guidance by noting that the recipient must log in with their own permissions, but does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., ais_list_external_portals) or when not to use it.

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