Skip to main content
Glama

VarynForge

by com.varynforge

Get write handoff

get_write_handoff
Read-only

One-call writer handoff: returns a compact writing payload for an article suggestion (brief essentials, keywords, acceptance criteria, lint instructions). Compact by design — FAQs cap at 6 and long sections degrade to fit a deep-link budget; the FULL brief is get_article_brief and the full check list is get_lint_rubric, so verify against those, not this. deepLinks (ChatGPT/Claude URLs embedding the payload) is null over MCP — it exists for web users without a connected agent.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contextYesOne sentence: what is the operator trying to achieve right now? Describe their goal, not this tool's purpose.
suggestionIdYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / context
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "One sentence: what is the operator trying to achieve right now? Describe their goal, not this tool's purpose.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "suggestionId"
-]New value: +[
+  "suggestionId",
+  "context"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds non-obvious behavior beyond that: FAQs cap at 6, long sections degrade to fit a deep-link budget, and deepLinks is null over MCP. It also clarifies that the payload is intentionally compact and not authoritative, which is important for correct use. No contradiction with annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Four sentences, with the core operation front-loaded in the first sentence and the limitations and alternatives following. Every sentence adds distinct value—contents, truncation behavior, sibling routing, and MCP-specific null behavior—with no filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a read-only one-call retrieval with no output schema, the description sufficiently covers the return payload, its compact/degraded nature, the deepLinks caveat, and authoritative fallback sources. Combined with the readOnlyHint annotation and clear sibling distinction, an agent has enough context to decide whether and how to invoke it correctly.

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 context parameter already has a clear schema description, but suggestionId only has format/pattern and no description. The tool description does not explicitly map parameters; it indirectly implies suggestionId refers to an article suggestion via the phrase 'for an article suggestion,' but it never states it directly. With 50% schema coverage, this is adequate but not thorough.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names the specific operation ('returns a compact writing payload') and resource ('for an article suggestion'), and enumerates the payload contents (brief essentials, keywords, acceptance criteria, lint instructions). It also explicitly distinguishes itself from get_article_brief and get_lint_rubric, so an agent can immediately tell it apart from siblings.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It explicitly names the alternatives (get_article_brief for the full brief, get_lint_rubric for the full check list) and warns to verify against those rather than this compact output. It also discloses that deepLinks is null over MCP, preventing agents from expecting a web-only feature. This is clear when-to-use and when-not-to guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All VarynForge toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools target a distinct resource and action, and the descriptions carefully cross-reference close alternatives (e.g., add_article_suggestion vs create_article_suggestion_with_input vs accept_idea). A few brief/read variants like get_article_brief, get_write_handoff, and download_brief_markdown could still be confused despite helpful explanations, so the set is not perfectly unambiguous.

Naming Consistency5/5

Tool names follow a highly consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern throughout: get_*, list_*, create_*, update_*, set_*, add_*, delete_*, start_*, expand_*, etc. Even the less common names like lint_draft and remap_asset are still clear verb_noun constructions.

Tool Count1/5

At 57 tools, this far exceeds the 50+ extreme threshold for a single MCP server. Even for a broad content workflow, the surface is overwhelming and would benefit from consolidation or splitting into focused servers.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers the full content lifecycle: project setup, research runs, opportunity clustering, suggestion creation, brief generation, drafting, linting, publishing, reporting, and account management. Minor gaps exist—destinations and projects cannot be deleted via MCP, and there is no direct update for article suggestion metadata—but these are workable via the web UI or existing tools.

Resources