Retrieve the Voidly Global Censorship Index to view summary statistics and monitored countries ranked by anomaly rate, revealing where internet censorship is concentrated.
Get the Voidly Global Censorship Index - a comprehensive overview of internet censorship across the monitored countries. Returns summary statistics and the most censored countries ranked by anomaly rate.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v3.0.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses what the return contains (summary statistics plus a ranked list), which is genuine behavioral context, but says nothing about freshness, coverage of 'monitored countries,' or whether the index is cached/aggregated over a time window.
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 sentences, front-loaded with the resource name and followed immediately by the return shape. 'Comprehensive overview' is mild filler but overall the text is tight.
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?
With no output schema and no parameters, the description reasonably covers what the caller gets back (summary stats and a ranked list). It would be complete except that the returned entity overlap with get_most_censored leaves routing ambiguity unresolved.
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?
The tool takes zero parameters, so the schema imposes no semantic load and the description has nothing to compensate for. Baseline of 4 applies for a parameterless tool.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ('Get the Voidly Global Censorship Index') and describes the scope (internet censorship across monitored countries). However, it claims to return 'the most censored countries ranked by anomaly rate,' which overlaps almost verbatim with the sibling get_most_censored, and it does not differentiate itself from that sibling or from sentinel_global_heatmap.
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?
There is no when-to-use guidance, no stated alternatives, and no exclusions. An agent choosing between this and get_most_censored, get_country_status, or sentinel_global_heatmap gets no help from the description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.