MCP Action Firewall

Get Structured Content Tool

get-structured-content

Retrieve structured content with an output schema to validate client data. Select a city from New York, Chicago, or Los Angeles to get standardized results.

Instructions

Returns structured content along with an output schema for client data validation

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "location": "<location>"
    },
    "name": "get-structured-content"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`location`	Yes	Choose city

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`temperature`	Yes	Temperature in celsius
`conditions`	Yes	Weather conditions description
`humidity`	Yes	Humidity percentage

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.0Mar 26, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully inform about behavior. It does not disclose side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or error handling. It implies a read operation but lacks explicit safety guarantees.

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?

The description is a single sentence that is direct and front-loaded with the action. It contains no fluff and is appropriately sized for the simple tool.

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?

The tool has an output schema, so return values are covered externally. However, the description does not explain the relationship between the location parameter and the returned structured content, leaving some context missing.

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 input schema covers 100% of parameters with a clear description for 'location'. The tool description adds no additional parameter context beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline but not exceeding it.

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 tool returns structured content with an output schema for client data validation. It uses a specific verb 'returns' and specifies the resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools, leaving some ambiguity about uniqueness.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools like 'echo' exist, but no comparison or usage context is given, leaving agents without decision support.

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

Deploy Server