help
Read-onlyIdempotent
Short orientation text for apples MCP callers.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Ezoic Setup Assistant
by com.ezoic
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the description adds minimal behavioral context beyond stating it provides 'orientation text.' No contradictions, but no additional disclosure.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness4/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, concise sentence with no wasted words. However, it could be slightly more informative without sacrificing brevity.
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?
Given the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema, high annotation coverage), the description is functionally complete but lacks details on the content or format of the orientation text, leaving the agent somewhat uninformed.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters4/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool has zero parameters and the input schema is empty (100% coverage). The description adds meaning by explaining the tool's output (orientation text), which is sufficient for a parameterless tool.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose5/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool provides 'short orientation text for apples MCP callers,' specifying the verb ('provide orientation') and resource ('text'). It distinguishes from sibling tools (ask, read_response, request_status) by implying general help rather than specific actions.
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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention scenarios, exclusions, or prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
A4.2/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool has a clear, distinct purpose: ask initiates a query job, help provides orientation, read_response streams job output, and request_status checks job progress. No overlap or ambiguity.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tool names follow a consistent pattern: single verbs (ask, help) and verb_noun combinations (read_response, request_status), all lowercase with underscores for multi-word names.
Tool Count5/5
With 4 tools covering the core workflow of asking questions and retrieving responses asynchronously, the count is well-scoped and appropriate for the server's purpose.
Completeness5/5
The tool surface fully covers the expected lifecycle: initiate a job (ask), check its status (request_status), and retrieve the result (read_response), plus help. No obvious gaps given the domain.