Post a review on a book you have purchased. One review per book; editable only within 24 hours. Reviews are public and feed the book's average rating, helping future buyers decide.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| body | Yes | Review text, 50-5000 characters | |
| title | No | ||
| rating | Yes | Star rating, 1 (worst) to 5 (best) | |
| book_id | Yes | ||
| language | No | en |
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?
With no annotations present, the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It reveals multiple side effects and constraints: public visibility, influence on the book's average rating, uniqueness per book, and a 24-hour edit window. This goes well beyond basic operation descriptions.
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 pack the essential action, prerequisite, constraints, and consequences. No filler or redundancy.
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?
The description covers the main use case and behavioral constraints, but since there is no output schema, it omits what the API returns on success/failure and how errors (e.g., duplicate review, expired edit window) are signaled. It also lacks details on optional parameters like title/language. This leaves noticeable gaps for an agent needing full operational context.
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 tool description does not explain any parameters; it only indirectly implies book_id via 'purchased book'. With only 40% schema description coverage, title, book_id, and language remain undocumented, and the description does not compensate. Rating and body are partially captured in the schema, but the tool-level text adds no parameter details.
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 opens with a specific verb and object ('Post a review'), identifies the required prerequisite ('book you have purchased'), and covers the core behavior. It distinguishes this from sibling tools like update_my_review and comment_on_review by focusing on creating a new review.
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?
States the eligibility condition (purchased book) and describes limits (one per book, editable only within 24 hours), giving clear when-to-use context. However, it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools for editing or commenting, so it stops short of full usage guidance.
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.
Several tools have overlapping purposes. For example, list_my_books and my_books both list authored books, and author_dashboard is a superset; list_orders and my_orders are near-duplicates; check_earnings and payout_balance both report earnings. This creates confusion and risks misselection.
Naming is inconsistent. While many tools use verb_noun (list_annotations, get_book_details), others use my_* (my_books, my_orders), bare nouns (payout_balance), or compound verbs (connect_onboard). The lack of a uniform pattern makes the set feel disjointed.
49 tools is excessive for a server, especially with at least three sets of near-duplicates. The platform is complex, but many tools could be merged (e.g., my_books and list_my_books, list_orders and my_orders). This count will overwhelm agents and increase misselection risk.
The toolset covers the core domain well: discover, purchase, read, comment, review, annotate, publish, monetize, verify, and manage payouts. Minor gaps exist, such as no update/delete annotation, no delete review, and no single-item getter for annotations/reviews, but these are not critical to the main workflows.