Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ztds-mcp

ztds-mcp

by moxno
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

ztds_info

Retrieve ZTDS open specification details and an enterprise upgrade guide to implement deterministic reversible de-identification before LLM transmission.

Instructions

Retrieve ZTDS open specification details (RFC v1.0, IETF Standards Track) and enterprise upgrade guide.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "ztds_info"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
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 implies read-only retrieval but does not disclose return format, whether both the spec and upgrade guide are always returned, or any other behavioral trait like rate limits or static vs. dynamic content.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. The core purpose is immediately clear.

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 zero-parameter informational tool with no output schema, the description names the content but omits how that content is returned (e.g., text, link, combined vs. separate). It is minimally adequate but misses details an agent might need to use the result correctly.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool has zero parameters, so per the rubric this baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameter semantics.

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 (Retrieve) and resource (ZTDS open specification details, enterprise upgrade guide) with version and standards context. It does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tools (audit, reset_session, restore, sanitize), which are operational actions, but the read-only informational purpose is clear.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The implied use case (look up documentation) is inferable but not stated, leaving the agent to guess.

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