Malja MCP

Official

by marsaplatform

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Hybrid

Food security (IPC)

food_security

Read-only

Retrieve IPC food-insecurity phase breakdowns for a country, including people per phase 1–5 and the phase 3+ crisis-or-worse headline, with optional year and language.

Instructions

Latest IPC food-insecurity phase breakdown for a country: people per phase 1–5, with phase 3+ ("crisis or worse") as the headline. Data: IPC via HDX.

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": {
      "country": "<country>"
    },
    "name": "food_security"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`year`	No	Analysis year (default: latest available)
`locale`	No	Language of the human-readable text output: "en" (default) or "ar" (Modern Standard Arabic, right-to-left). Structured JSON fields, ISO3 codes and dataset ids stay in English either way.
`country`	Yes	Country name or ISO3 code, e.g. "Egypt", "EGY", "syria"

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`year`	Yes
`phases`	Yes
`source`	Yes
`country`	Yes
`country_code`	Yes
`people_crisis_or_worse`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedv0.8.0Oct 29, 2026
- removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
- addedInput schema / properties / year / maximum
```
Added value: +9007199254740991
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / phases / propertyNames
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
First observedv0.7.0Oct 20, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds useful context: the data provenance (IPC via HDX) and the definition of the headline phase 3+ 'crisis or worse'. It doesn't mention coverage gaps, staleness, or what 'latest available' means in practice, so it adds some but not rich context.

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?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the resource and metric, then the headline definition and source. Nothing wasted and no backward reference needed.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Output schema exists, so return values needn't be explained, and the description supplies the source, the phase breakdown and the headline metric. Only gap is any caveat on data coverage/recency for a tool marked openWorld, which is minor.

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% — country accepts name or ISO3, year defaults to latest, locale enum documented — so the schema already carries parameter meaning. The description adds nothing parameter-specific; 'for a country' merely restates the required param. Baseline 3 applies.

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+resource: 'Latest IPC food-insecurity phase breakdown for a country', naming the metric (people per phase 1-5) and headline indicator (phase 3+). An agent can tell this apart from conflict_events or humanitarian_funding by the IPC framing, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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 gives no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative routing. It implies this is the food-security lookup, but an agent comparing against conflict_events, humanitarian_funding or country_profile gets no guidance on which to pick.

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