saludar
Greets a person by returning a simple salutation using their provided name.
Instructions
Devuelve un saludo simple.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| nombre | Yes |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Greets a person by returning a simple salutation using their provided name.
Devuelve un saludo simple.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| nombre | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses no behavioral details beyond the basic outcome (returning a greeting), lacking any information on side effects, permissions, or constraints.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, clear sentence with no extraneous words. It is appropriately front-loaded and brief.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
While the tool is simple and an output schema exists, the description is too brief for a tool with a required parameter. It omits any guidance on how the parameter should be provided or what constitutes a valid input, reducing completeness.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not elaborate on the 'nombre' parameter or its meaning. The input schema provides only a title ('Nombre'), leaving the agent to infer usage.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description 'Devuelve un saludo simple' clearly states the action (returns) and the resource (a simple greeting), matching the tool's name and purpose. With no sibling tools, differentiation is not needed.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is provided on when or when not to use this tool, nor are there any alternatives mentioned. The description is purely functional without context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/sebastianzapatar/mcp2026'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server