Syncretica MCP Server

generate_god_embedding

Calculates a 1024-dimensional vector embedding for a deity by ID using the configured model, enabling semantic search and comparison.

Instructions

Calculate 1024-dimensional vector embedding for a deity using the configured embedding model.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "generate_god_embedding"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	God ID
`sync`	No	If true, wait synchronously for embedding generation to finish

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full behavioral burden but only hints that the result depends on a 'configured embedding model'. It never says whether the embedding is persisted to the god record, what happens on repeat calls (idempotency/cost), or how failures for a nonexistent god are surfaced.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with the verb, resource, and result shape; no filler, no repetition of the tool name.

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?

The tool is simple and its inputs are fully documented, so the definition is close to adequate. However, the consequence of `sync=false` (job handle? get_job_status follow-up?) and whether the vector is written back to the god record are left unstated, which matters for correct invocation sequencing.

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%, so both `id` and `sync` are already documented in structured form, which sets the baseline at 3. The description adds only the dimensionality/output nature of the result, not new meaning about the parameters themselves.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Calculate ... vector embedding for a deity') plus the output dimensionality (1024), which immediately separates it from generate_myth_embedding and from unrelated siblings like create_god or get_god.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, no prerequisite stated (e.g., that the god must already exist), and no explicit routing to generate_myth_embedding or get_job_status. Usage must be inferred entirely from the tool name and the word 'deity'.

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