Skip to main content
Glama
sebastienrousseau

iso20022-evidence-pack-mcp

Build an evidence pack

build_evidence_pack
Read-onlyIdempotent

Compiles ISO 20022 readiness, remediation, and simulation data into a sealed, tamper-evident audit pack with Ed25519 signing.

Instructions

Fold readiness, remediation, and simulations into a sealed pack.

Args:
    readiness_content: A readiness result, as JSON text.
    remediation_content: An optional remediation result, as JSON text.
    simulation_content: An optional JSON array of simulated responses.
    metadata: Free-form audit metadata (institution, reference, ...).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
metadataNoFree-form audit metadata.
readiness_contentYesA readiness result as raw JSON text.
simulation_contentNoOptional simulated-responses JSON.
remediation_contentNoOptional remediation JSON text.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior1/5

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

The description says 'Fold into a sealed pack' implying creation, but annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, contradicting the implication of a side effect. No additional behavioral traits disclosed beyond the contradiction.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The single-sentence front-loading is good, but the Args section is redundant with the schema, adding unnecessary length.

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?

While the description explains the tool's purpose and inputs, it omits description of the return value (though output schema exists). The contradiction with annotations undermines completeness. Adequate but with gaps.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description's Args block mirrors the schema without adding new semantics, formats, or constraints.

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 clearly states the verb 'Fold into' and resource 'sealed pack', listing the three content types. It is specific but does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like seal_pack or sign_pack.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as seal_pack, sign_pack, or render_markdown. The description implies usage for combining specific content types but does not state when not to use it.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/sebastienrousseau/iso20022-evidence-pack-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server