Test connectivity to Overpass API servers by checking all available endpoints.
Overpass APIサーバーへの接続をテストします。すべての利用可能なサーバーに対して接続確認を行います。
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": "test_connection"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that connections are tested against all servers, but does not mention side effects, rate limits, timeout behavior, or output format. This is minimally adequate for a test tool.
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?
Two concise sentences with no wasted words. The description is front-loaded with the core purpose and provides necessary scope ('all available servers').
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?
For a simple parameter-less test tool, the description is relatively complete. It lacks details about the output (e.g., returns success/failure status or detailed per-server results), but the tool's simplicity makes this acceptable.
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?
There are zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter information, earning the baseline score of 4.
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?
Description clearly states it tests connection to Overpass API servers and checks all available servers. This is a specific verb-resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling data-retrieval tools.
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?
The description implies using this tool as a connectivity check before executing data retrieval tools. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the context is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.