Summarize the public canon
canon.summaryRead-onlyIdempotent
Return the public canon registry's total concepts, version, type vocabulary, and counts.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
agenttool
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already convey readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds value by enumerating the output components (concepts, version, type vocabulary, counts), giving the agent a clearer expectation of the data returned. It could mention format or edge cases, but with annotations covering safety, this is strong.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence that precisely states the action and output. Every word contributes meaning with no redundancy or filler.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness5/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given zero parameters, no output schema, and read-only annotations, the description fully covers what the tool does and what it returns. It lists the key result categories, which is sufficient for such a simple summary operation.
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, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description adds no parameter details because none exist. Per guidelines, a baseline of 4 is appropriate for zero-parameter tools.
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 returns specific summary information (total concepts, version, type vocabulary, and counts) from the public canon registry. The verb 'Return' and precise resource/scope distinguish it from sibling tools like canon.by_type or canon.lookup.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines3/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies usage for obtaining an overview or summary of the canon, but it does not explicitly mention when to avoid this tool or recommend alternatives. There is no direct comparison to siblings, making guidance indirect.
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
The four canon tools each serve a clear, distinct purpose: listing by type, listing types, lookup by URN, and summary stats. The wake.platform tool is completely separate, so there is no ambiguity.
Naming Consistency3/5
Tools use a domain.method pattern (canon.*, wake.*), but the method parts are inconsistent: one uses a prepositional phrase (by_type), others use verb+noun (list_types), single word (lookup), or noun (summary, platform). This mix reduces consistency.
Tool Count5/5
With 5 tools covering distinct operations on a canon registry plus a platform info tool, the count is well-scoped for the apparent domain. Not too few or too many.
Completeness4/5
The canon tools provide essential read operations (list, filter, lookup, metadata) but lack a direct 'list all entries' tool and any write functionality. For a likely read-only registry, these are minor gaps.