Gets the HTML embed code for a Riddle by its UUID. The code is returned regardless of publish state, but the URL it embeds will not serve the Riddle until it is published.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| UUID | Yes | The UUID of the Riddle you want to retrieve the HTML embed code for |
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 and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral information beyond annotations: the publish-state independence and the fact that the embedded URL will not function until published. This is valuable non-obvious 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 sentences, no filler. The first sentence front-loads the core purpose, and the second adds an important caveat. Every word earns its place.
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 one-parameter read-only tool, the description covers the purpose, the identifier, and the publish-state behavior. With no output schema, a slightly more explicit note about what is returned (the HTML string) could help, but 'HTML embed code' is sufficiently clear for correct invocation.
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 100%, and the single UUID parameter is already well documented in the input schema. The description only restates that the tool operates by UUID, adding no new format, constraints, or usage nuances beyond what the schema provides.
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 states a specific verb ('Gets'), a precise resource ('HTML embed code for a Riddle'), and the key identifier ('by its UUID'). This clearly separates it from sibling tools like riddle_get or riddle_builder_update, which concern other aspects of a Riddle.
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 gives clear context: the embed code is available regardless of publish state, which tells an agent it can use this tool even before publishing. It also warns about the consequence (the URL will not serve until published), providing practical guidance, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.
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 targets a distinct resource and action: media, palettes, projects, question banks, Riddle builds, publish lifecycle, tags, and templates are cleanly separated. Even near-neighbors like question_bank_get versus question_bank_get_items or riddle_tag versus question_bank_tag are disambiguated by explicit scope descriptions.
Names follow a consistent lowercase snake_case domain-prefix plus action pattern, such as riddle_get, riddle_publish, question_bank_create, and media_delete. Minor deviations like question_bank_item, question_bank_manage, and the standalone ping/whoami break the pattern slightly.
At 38 tools, the set is well above the 25+ threshold and is heavy for an agent to navigate in a single context. Most tools are individually justified, but the surface could be consolidated, particularly around tag operations, template listing variants, and question bank actions.
The Riddle lifecycle is well covered: build, validate, update, publish, unpublish, move, rename, delete, embed, tag, and fetch stats. Minor gaps remain, such as no template delete/update, no media library listing, and no project create/update/delete, but these are workable around or arguably outside the core domain.