Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
doricomcp

doricomcp

by kulbiq
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

describe_enums

Retrieves exact accepted values for a Dorico enum type, or matches enum type names by regex, so you can validate inputs before editing a score.

Instructions

Exact accepted values of a Dorico enum type (or regex over enum type names). [READ-ONLY: not yet confirmed by the live harness]

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "describe_enums"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It usefully states that the operation is read-only and unconfirmed by the live harness, but it does not describe the return format, regex semantics, error behavior, or other practical constraints.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is very short and front-loads the core behavior before the read-only caveat. It contains no filler, though the parenthetical regex behavior and bracketed harness note are slightly terse.

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 one-parameter lookup tool with no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and read-only status. However, it leaves out return-value structure and regex matching details that an agent would need to invoke it confidently.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the sole parameter is only named 'name' in the schema. The description adds meaningful context by indicating that 'name' refers to an enum type name or a regex over enum type names, but it does not specify regex syntax, case sensitivity, or matching rules.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: it returns exact accepted values for a Dorico enum type, with an optional regex over enum type names. It is clear enough to distinguish from sibling lookup tools like describe_commands and describe_property, though it does not explicitly compare itself to them.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description implies the tool is a lookup for enum values, but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no alternatives, and no guidance on choosing an exact enum name versus a regex pattern.

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