nth_prime
Get the nth prime number.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| n | Yes | Which prime number (1=2, 2=3, etc.) |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| n | Yes | ||
| prime | Yes |
Get the nth prime number.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| n | Yes | Which prime number (1=2, 2=3, etc.) |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| n | Yes | ||
| prime | 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?
Without annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention any side effects, performance characteristics, or limitations beyond what the schema provides. The description is minimal but not misleading.
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 extremely concise at 5 words, with no redundant information. It effectively communicates the tool's 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?
Given the tool's simplicity (single parameter, output schema present), the description is nearly complete. It could mention that the result is the prime number, but it is implied. The presence of an output schema reduces the burden.
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 fully describes the parameter n with min, max, and description. The description adds no additional meaning beyond 'Which prime number (1=2, 2=3, etc.)' already present in the schema.
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 'Get the nth prime number' clearly states the verb (Get) and resource (nth prime number). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like is_prime, prime_factors, and nth_square by directly targeting prime number generation.
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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as is_prime or primes_in_range. There is no mention of constraints like performance for large n or input boundaries (though schema sets max=10000).
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.