subfeed_chat
Chat with your entity.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Entity ID | |
| message | Yes | Message to send | |
| sessionId | No | Session ID for conversation continuity |
Subfeed
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
C2.7/5.0
Behavior1/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention side effects (e.g., whether messages are stored), authentication requirements, rate limits, or the nature of the response, making the tool's behavior opaque.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness4/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words, which is efficient. However, it is so brief that it borders on under-specification, though it still conveys the essential action.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness2/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description should explain more about expected behavior and return value. It also omits context about what an 'entity' is and how chat interaction works, leaving significant gaps.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters3/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema provides complete descriptions for all parameters (id, message, sessionId), so the baseline is 3. The tool description does not add any parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already states, but no compensation is needed.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose4/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb 'chat' with a clear resource ('your entity'), which conveys the core function. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like subfeed_invoke or subfeed_get_entity, leaving some ambiguity about what 'chat' specifically entails.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines2/5
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. There is no mention of prerequisites, appropriate scenarios, or exclusions, leaving the agent to guess.
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
B3.3/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool targets a clear, distinct operation: entity CRUD, addon management, discovery, interaction, and registration. While chat, invoke, and webhook all involve communication, their descriptions clearly differentiate entity chat from public invocation and webhook payloads.
Naming Consistency4/5
All tools share the 'subfeed_' prefix and use snake_case, with most following a verb_noun pattern (create_entity, delete_entity, list_addons). A few use bare verbs (chat, invoke, register) or noun-only (webhook), but the pattern is still recognizable and predictable.
Tool Count5/5
15 tools is at the upper edge of the ideal range, but it matches the server's broad scope covering entities, addons, models, discovery, and user registration. Each tool serves a distinct purpose and none feel redundant.
Completeness4/5
The surface covers full entity lifecycle (create, get, update, delete, publish), addon management (enable, disable, list), entity discovery, and user registration. Minor gaps like an explicit unpublish or webhook management can be worked around via update_entity or standalone webhook sending.