Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
EasySourceFlow

EasySourceFlow

by john-ops-lab
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

easysourceflow_health_check

Read-onlyIdempotent

Verifies that all dependencies and runtime settings for EasySourceFlow content summarization service are correctly configured, ensuring the server operates without issues.

Instructions

Check EasySourceFlow dependencies and runtime configuration.

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": "easysourceflow_health_check"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

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 declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds value by specifying that it checks dependencies and runtime configuration, but does not elaborate on what dependencies or configuration aspects are checked.

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 clear sentence with no unnecessary words, effectively communicating the tool's purpose.

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 health check tool with no parameters and good annotations, the description is adequate but could be more complete by hinting at the output format (e.g., returns a status report). It lacks detail on what the check covers.

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 no parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter information; baseline is 4 for zero-parameter tools.

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's purpose: checking dependencies and runtime configuration. This is a specific verb+resource that distinguishes it from siblings like backup, submit, or cancel operations.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or comparison with alternatives is provided. While the sibling context implies this is for health checks, the description lacks guidance on when to invoke this tool versus others.

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