USERDATA

define_concept

Define a custom XBRL concept as a weighted sum of reported concepts to create derived metrics traceable to source filings.

Instructions

Defines an own XBRL concept as a weighted sum of reported ones.

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": {
      "concept_name": "<concept_name>",
      "definition_text": "<definition_text>",
      "concept_formula": "<concept_formula>"
    },
    "name": "define_concept"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`concept_name`	Yes
`concept_formula`	Yes
`definition_text`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 8, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not say whether the concept persists beyond the session, whether redefining an existing name overwrites it, what permissions or prior data pulls are required, or how formula errors are handled — all critical for a creation tool.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, but the brevity comes at the cost of the missing detail noted elsewhere rather than being concision in service of clarity.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. However, for a three-parameter creation tool with zero schema descriptions and a free-form nested formula array, the description leaves an agent without enough information to construct a valid call or predict side effects.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% across three required parameters, so the description must compensate and largely does not. 'Weighted sum of reported ones' weakly implies the formula carries weights and references to existing concepts, but the array-of-objects shape of concept_formula and the roles of concept_name and definition_text are left entirely unexplained.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('Defines an own XBRL concept') plus a mechanism ('as a weighted sum of reported ones'), so an agent knows this creates a derived metric. It does not distinguish itself from the sibling 'compute_concept', which an agent could easily confuse with concept definition, so the sibling differentiation gap keeps it below 5.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites such as an active project or session, and no reference to the closest alternative, compute_concept. Usage is only implied by the phrase 'own XBRL concept'.

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