Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ti-nspire-mcp

ti-nspire-mcp

by reliasdomi
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_device_specs

Retrieve complete technical specifications, supported Python modules, and hardware constraints for Texas Instruments calculators to verify compatibility before development.

Instructions

Proporciona especificaciones técnicas completas, módulos de Python soportados y restricciones de hardware de la calculadora Texas Instruments.

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": "get_device_specs"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
modelNoTI-Nspire CX II

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose the content categories returned (specs, Python module support, hardware limits), implying a safe read, but says nothing about behavior for unknown or unsupported models or whether the data is static.

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; everything stated is relevant. It is efficient but leaves the parameter and usage context unaddressed.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the tool is a simple read. However, for a device-lookup tool the description should at least indicate which model identifiers are accepted or that a default is used, which it omits.

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% for the single 'model' parameter, and the description never mentions it or explains accepted values; only the schema's default hints at valid input. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema here.

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 names a specific resource (technical specifications, supported Python modules, hardware restrictions) for a specific device family (Texas Instruments calculator), so the agent knows exactly what it retrieves. It does not differentiate from siblings such as get_calculator_status, which could plausibly overlap in scope.

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 indication of when to call this versus get_calculator_status or the conversion/template tools, nor any stated prerequisites. Usage must be inferred entirely from the purpose sentence.

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