Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
CASDA MCP Server

CASDA MCP Server

by jbwod
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Verify local CASDA download

casda_verify_file
Read-onlyIdempotent

Re-verify checksum and length of an existing downloaded file to confirm data integrity.

Instructions

Re-verify checksum and length of an existing file under the download root.

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": {
      "path": "<path>"
    },
    "name": "casda_verify_file"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYesPath under CASDA_DOWNLOAD_DIR of an existing downloaded file.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
errorNo
existsYes
checksumNo
local_pathYes
provenanceNo
size_bytesNo
content_length_verifiedNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds specific behavioral detail: it re-verifies checksum and length. No contradictions, and the description enriches the agent's understanding beyond annotations.

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?

A single sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. No extraneous words. Front-loaded with the action (re-verify) and scope (existing file under download root).

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, idempotent, read-only, with output schema), the description is fully adequate. The output schema covers return value details. No missing behavioral or contextual information.

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%. The parameter 'path' is described in the schema as 'Path under CASDA_DOWNLOAD_DIR of an existing downloaded file.' The description repeats the 'under the download root' concept, adding no new meaning. Baseline 3 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 specific verb 'Re-verify' and resource 'checksum and length of an existing file under the download root'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like casda_download_product (downloads) and casda_get_product (metadata retrieval).

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 implies usage context (re-verify a downloaded file) but provides no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative tools. No contraindications or prerequisites are stated.

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