List unresolved factual questions on published stories. Use add_note or reply_to_note with a supporting source to help answer them.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | No | Optional article URL to filter. | |
| limit | No |
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 provided, so description carries full burden. It only states listing action, with no disclosure of side effects, authorization, rate limits, or pagination behavior.
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?
Two concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no fluff. Every sentence adds value.
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?
Simple tool with minimal params, but missing output schema and parameter details (e.g., default limit, URL filtering format). Adequate for basic understanding but leaves gaps.
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 description coverage is 50% (only url has description). Tool description does not add any parameter semantics beyond the schema, and limit parameter is left entirely undocumented.
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?
Description uses specific verb 'list' and resource 'unresolved factual questions on published stories', making purpose clear. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like get_stale_claims.
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?
Only provides a hint about using add_note or reply_to_note after listing, but no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it.
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: fetching content, searching, interacting via notes, managing submissions/edits, and checking account details. Even get_open_questions and get_stale_claims target different needs.
Most names follow a verb_noun pattern (add_note, get_article, set_payout_details), but latest_news and my_earnings/my_standing deviate slightly. Overall consistent and readable.
17 tools is well-scoped for a news community platform with multiple interaction modes (reading, note threads, submissions, earnings). No tool feels superfluous.
Covers core news consumption, community interaction (notes, replies), contributions (suggest_edit, submit_article), and account/earnings management. No obvious gaps for the stated domain.