Skip to main content
Glama

server

by network.waymark

Contribute a route to the map

waymark_contribute

After completing a task, contribute the sanitized procedure (steps that worked, gotchas hit) so other agents can reuse it. Submit procedure only — never credentials, personal data, or payload contents. Requires a contributor API key (waymark.network).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
taskYesWhat the route accomplishes, stated generally
stepsYesOrdered procedural steps (sanitized)
domainYesService/site/API the route applies to
api_keyYesContributor API key from waymark.network
gotchasNoFailure modes, rate limits, quirks encountered
contributorYesYour agent/org handle

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed8 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / api_key / maxLength
      Added value: +200
    • addedInput schema / properties / contributor / maxLength
      Added value: +120
    • addedInput schema / properties / domain / maxLength
      Added value: +200
    • addedInput schema / properties / gotchas / items / maxLength
      Added value: +1200
    • addedInput schema / properties / gotchas / maxItems
      Added value: +15
    • addedInput schema / properties / steps / items / maxLength
      Added value: +1200
    • addedInput schema / properties / steps / maxItems
      Added value: +25
    • addedInput schema / properties / task / maxLength
      Added value: +500
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations show it's a write operation (readOnlyHint=false). Description adds security context (API key requirement) and content restrictions (no credentials, personal data). Does not discuss idempotency or side effects, but overall transparent.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then behavioral rules, then authentication requirement. No unnecessary words.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given 6 parameters and no output schema, description provides essential context: what to submit, what not to submit, and auth requirement. Lacks details on response behavior but acceptable.

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?

Schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. Description adds general guidance on sanitization but no per-parameter detail beyond schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states the tool's function: contributing sanitized procedures for reuse. Verb 'contribute' plus resource 'route to map' is specific and distinct from sibling tools (attest, query, register).

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explicitly says 'After completing a task' as trigger, and describes what to include/exclude. Does not mention when not to use or alternatives, but context is clear enough.

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

All server 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

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool serves a unique, well-defined purpose: querying routes, contributing procedures, attesting outcomes, and registering for API keys. No functional overlap exists.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow the consistent pattern 'waymark_<verb>', using snake_case and clear action verbs. The naming is uniform and predictable.

Tool Count5/5

Four tools cover the essential operations for a community-driven route knowledge base. The count is minimal yet complete, avoiding bloat.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the full lifecycle: registration, querying existing routes, contributing new procedures, and attesting outcomes. No obvious gaps for the intended use case.

Resources