Find relevant CCA Decision Support Assets for a given decision query
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | Natural language description of the decision | |
| audience | No | Intended audience (optional) | |
| category | No | Category filter (optional) | |
| geography | No | Geographic context (optional) | |
| max_results | No | Maximum results (default: 5) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of explaining the tool's behavior. It only restates the search intent and does not disclose whether results are ranked, how relevance is determined, whether the operation is read-only, or any limitations. There is no contradiction, but there is also little behavioral disclosure.
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?
The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant phrasing. Every word contributes to conveying the tool's core purpose.
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?
The input schema covers all parameter meaning, and the tool's search intent is understandable. However, with no output schema and no annotations, the description does not describe return format, ranking, or how filters affect results, leaving a minimally viable but not fully complete picture.
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 input schema already provides descriptions for all five parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds little beyond echoing the query concept and does not clarify filter combination, default behavior, or result limits beyond what the schema already states.
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?
The description states a specific verb ('Find'), a resource ('CCA Decision Support Assets'), and the input context ('for a given decision query'). It is clear and suggests a search/retrieval behavior distinct from listing categories or getting details, though it does not explicitly name or contrast the sibling 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?
Usage is implied rather than explicit: the tool should be used when there is a natural-language decision query and relevant assets are needed. The description does not mention when not to use it or point toward get_decision_tool_details or list_decision_support_categories as alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: find assets, get details by slug, and list categories. There is no overlap or ambiguity in what they do.
All tools follow a verb_noun pattern (find, get, list). Minor inconsistency exists between 'decision_support_tool' and 'decision_tool' in the second tool name, but overall the convention is clear and uniform.
Three tools is slightly minimal but well-scoped for a decision-support catalog lookup service. Each tool covers a distinct need, though the set feels a bit sparse for a 'network'.
The surface covers the core read-only workflow: search for assets, retrieve details, and browse categories. It lacks obvious creation/update/delete operations, but those may be outside the intended scope.