Skip to main content
Glama
santinohicke

UCA MCP

by santinohicke
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Progreso de Carrera y Materias Faltantes para Recibirse

guarani_progreso_carrera
Read-onlyIdempotent

Calculate remaining subjects to graduate in SIU Guaraní for a degree, with approved, in-progress, and pending-by-year breakdowns.

Instructions

Calcula exactamente cuántas materias te faltan para recibirte en SIU Guaraní ('Te faltan X materias'), cuántas tenés aprobadas, cursando actualmente y el desglose de materias pendientes por año.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
carreraNoNombre o código de la carrera en Guaraní

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv1.0.8
    • removedInput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
-  "additionalProperties": false,
-  "properties": {
-    "aprobadas": {
-      "type": "number"
-    },
-    "carrera": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "cursando": {
-      "type": "number"
-    },
-    "faltantesParaRecibirse": {
-      "type": "number"
-    },
-    "materiasEnCurso": {
-      "items": {
-        "type": "string"
-      },
-      "type": "array"
-    },
-    "materiasRestantesPorAnio": {
-      "additionalProperties": {
-        "items": {
-          "type": "string"
-        },
-        "type": "array"
-      },
-      "type": "object"
-    },
-    "mensaje": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "plan": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "porcentajeAvance": {
-      "type": "number"
-    },
-    "regularizadas": {
-      "type": "number"
-    },
-    "totalMaterias": {
-      "type": "number"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "totalMaterias",
-    "aprobadas",
-    "faltantesParaRecibirse",
-    "cursando",
-    "regularizadas",
-    "materiasEnCurso",
-    "materiasRestantesPorAnio",
-    "mensaje"
-  ],
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. First observedv1.0.6

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, openWorld), so the description's added value is in previewing the computed output: totals, approved, in-progress, and a per-year breakdown. It does not disclose the data source, auth requirement, or what happens when no career is resolvable, which keeps it below a 5.

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 sentence that front-loads the core result ('cuántas materias te faltan') and then enumerates the supporting breakdown. No filler or repetition.

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 read-only, one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description goes far by describing the returned metrics. The one gap is that 'carrera' is optional (0 required) and the description does not explain the default scope when it is omitted.

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?

The single 'carrera' parameter is fully documented in the schema (100% coverage), so a baseline of 3 applies. The description adds nothing about whether the argument is a name vs. code or what defaults to when omitted.

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 computation (counting remaining subjects to graduate) with concrete output examples ('Te faltan X materias'). It's clear what the tool does, but it never names a sibling to distinguish itself from close alternatives like guarani_historia_academica or guarani_plan_optimo, leaving that separation implicit.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is only implied by the described output. There is no explicit 'use this when you want X rather than Y' guidance, no prerequisite (e.g., being logged in), and no exclusion against the closely related academic-history and study-plan tools.

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