Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
omiss-mcp

omiss-mcp

by qso-graph
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Omiss Statehood Schedule

omiss_statehood_schedule
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve the 40m Statehood net schedule, including each net date, free-call states, and the next scheduled net.

Instructions

Get the 40m Statehood schedule: each 40m net date and its free-call states, and the next one.

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": "omiss_statehood_schedule"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare this a read-only, idempotent, open-world fetch, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a little domain framing about what the schedule contains, but with an output schema present it does not need to itemize return fields, and it says nothing about caching, freshness, or why it is open-world.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with zero filler. The clause describing the returned contents is the only elaboration and it earns its place.

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?

For a no-parameter read tool with a full annotation profile and an output schema, the description covers purpose and return shape adequately. The remaining gap is that domain terms like 'free-call states' and 'Statehood' are left unglossed and no routing to the general net schedule is offered.

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 takes zero parameters, so there are no semantics to clarify; the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly presents this as a plain fetch with no filtering dimension.

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 and resource: retrieve the 40m Statehood net schedule, including each date, its free-call states, and the next occurrence. That wording separates it from generic siblings like omiss_net_schedule, though the distinction is implied by 'Statehood'/'40m' rather than called out 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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no sibling is named as an alternative. An agent must infer from the label alone that this is the Statehood-specific schedule rather than the general one from omiss_net_schedule.

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