Card Magic MCP

decode_cards_tool

Determine the hidden fifth card from a sequence of four cards using the Chico & Dico magic trick algorithm.

Instructions

本函数实现魔术师 Dico 的操作：根据前四张牌猜第五张牌

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": {
      "cards": "<cards>"
    },
    "name": "decode_cards_tool"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`cards`	Yes	该参数接受 4 张牌，形如 ♠A ♥3 ♣10 ♦K 每张牌由【花色】和【数字】组成： - 可选的花色: - ♠ (黑桃, Spades) - ♥ (红心, Hearts) - ♦ (方块/方片, Diamonds) - ♣ (梅花, Clubs) - 可选的数字: A 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 J Q K 注意：请将花色和数字标准化后再作为参数传入

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.9Jul 5, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only states the magic trick operation. It does not disclose any behavioral traits, such as whether it is deterministic, error handling, or if it modifies state.

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?

Single sentence capturing the essence. No wasted words, though it is in Chinese. It could be slightly more informative but maintains conciseness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool has an output schema but the description never mentions what the function returns. For a guessing tool, the output is implicit but not stated. Given the simplicity, it is still incomplete.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with a detailed description of the 'cards' parameter format. The description itself adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description clearly states it implements a magician's trick to guess the fifth card from four given cards. It uses specific verb and resource, though it doesn't distinguish from sibling tool encode_cards_tool (likely the reverse operation).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling tool. It lacks any context about appropriate usage scenarios or prerequisites.

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

Deploy Server