Test whether an integer ≥ 2 is prime. Returns the verdict plus the prime factorization (useful for composite numbers).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| n | Yes | The integer to test. Must be ≥ 2. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| n | Yes | Input number, echoed back. | |
| is_prime | Yes | True if n is prime. | |
| factor_count | Yes | Number of prime factors (with multiplicity). | |
| prime_factors | Yes | Prime factorization of n. |
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?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds value by disclosing that the return includes the prime factorization, which is a behavioral detail beyond what the annotations provide. No contradiction with annotations.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence with zero wasted words. It immediately states the core function and adds a useful note about factorization without fluff.
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?
For a simple, stateless, read-only tool with a clear input schema and output schema, the description fully covers the essential behavior. It communicates the purpose and return value, and no additional context is needed for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.
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 schema has 100% coverage, including a full description for parameter n ('The integer to test. Must be ≥ 2.'). The tool description does not add any additional meaning about parameters, so it relies entirely on the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 clearly states the action ('Test'), the resource ('an integer ≥ 2'), and the purpose ('is prime'). It also mentions the additional output of prime factorization, which fully distinguishes it from sibling tools (no other prime-related tool exists).
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?
The description implies exactly when to use this tool: when you need to test primality. It doesn't name alternatives or exclusions, but because no sibling tool provides similar functionality, the context is clear and unambiguous. A 5 would require explicit alternative guidance, which isn't necessary here.
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.
Most tools have distinct purposes. However, 'hex-to-rgb' is redundant with 'color-converter', which already handles hex-to-RGB conversion, causing potential confusion.
Names follow a consistent lowercase-with-hyphens style, but vary in pattern (e.g., 'angle-converter', 'average-calculator', 'dedup-lines'). One tool ('internal-do-not-call') deviates from the descriptive norm.
With 46 tools, the server is heavily populated. Many converters could be merged into a generic unit converter, and there is redundancy, making the surface unnecessarily large for a single server.
The server covers a broad range of utility domains: converters, text processing, math, cryptography, etc. Minor redundancies exist (e.g., hex-to-rgb vs color-converter), but the set is otherwise comprehensive.
