Calculate geographic midpoint between two coordinates.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| lat1 | Yes | Latitude of point 1 | |
| lat2 | Yes | Latitude of point 2 | |
| lon1 | Yes | Longitude of point 1 | |
| lon2 | Yes | Longitude of point 2 |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| point1 | Yes | ||
| point2 | Yes | ||
| midpoint | Yes |
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?
No annotations are provided, so the minimal description carries full burden. It does not disclose the coordinate system (e.g., decimal degrees), formula used, or edge case handling (e.g., antipodal points).
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, direct sentence with no fluff. Could be improved by adding a hint about coordinate format without sacrificing conciseness.
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?
Lacks behavioral context such as assumptions about the earth model (spherical vs. ellipsoidal) and return value format, despite having an output schema. More context is needed for a calculation tool with no annotations.
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?
Schema provides descriptions for all 4 parameters (e.g., 'Latitude of point 1'), so coverage is 100%. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline.
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 ('Calculate') and the resource ('geographic midpoint between two coordinates'), which distinguishes it from other geographic tools like 'distance' or 'bounding_box'.
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?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'haversine_distance' or 'bounding_box'. No prerequisites or exclusions provided.
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.
Many tools have overlapping purposes, such as multiple random generators (random_integer, random_number), duplicate hashing functions (hash_md5, md5_checksum), and near-identical tools (compare, compare_2, compare_decimals). The sheer number of tools and lack of clear boundaries make it difficult for an agent to differentiate.
Naming is highly inconsistent. There are duplicate tools with different names (camel_case vs to_camel_case, slug vs slugify), arbitrary suffixes like '_2', and mixing of patterns (e.g., generate_password vs password_entropy). No clear convention is followed.
With 572 tools, the server is massively overpopulated for any coherent purpose. It includes trivial endpoints (true_endpoint, null, hello_world) and numerous duplicates, far exceeding a well-scoped utility set.
While the server covers many domains (math, strings, dates, colors, etc.), the presence of duplicate and trivial tools indicates a lack of thoughtful curation. There are gaps in basic operations (e.g., no dedicated file or network tools), and many tools are redundant.
