Token Tender

The Secret Menu Dare

secret_menu

A short scavenger hunt for one pour that is not on the menu. Call with no arguments to start: you get a run id and a riddle. The clues come back from explain_status and show_id when you pass them dare with your run id. Then call this tool again with run and answer (two words joined by a hyphen) to get the gold receipt and a share page. The bar counts the requests it sees for your run, so stop after 12 calls.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "secret_menu"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`run`	No	The run id from the first call. Omit to start a new dare.
`name`	No	Name shown on your receipt, tab and the room. Up to 32 characters after filtering, longer is cut. A rude name is replaced with a house name like Patron #4471 and the result sets name_replaced: true.
`answer`	No	Your answer: two lowercase words joined by a hyphen, like word-word. Needs run.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedNov 1, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / answer / description

Previous value: -"The two words, joined by a hyphen."New value: +"Your answer: two lowercase words joined by a hyphen, like word-word. Needs run."

changedInput schema / properties / name / description

Previous value: -"Your name. Filtered, cut at 32 characters. Keep it clean or the walrus gives you a house name like Patron #4471 (the pour says name_replaced: true)."New value: +"Name shown on your receipt, tab and the room. Up to 32 characters after filtering, longer is cut. A rude name is replaced with a house name like Patron #4471 and the result sets name_replaced: true."

AddedNov 1, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description adds substantial context beyond the annotations: the tool is stateful via run ids, involves a request-counting limit of 12 calls, and returns a gold receipt plus share page. It does not say what happens if the 12-call limit is exceeded, which keeps it from a 5.

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, front-loaded with the no-argument start and then the follow-up call. Every sentence carries necessary workflow or constraint information, with no filler.

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 an output schema exists, the description needn't explain return values. It covers the multi-step interaction and rate limit well, though it omits edge cases such as whether an invalid answer can be retried or how the run expires.

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 coverage is 100%, so the parameter meanings are already documented. The description reinforces the flow-dependent use of run ('from the first call') and the answer format ('two words joined by a hyphen'), but adds little beyond what the schema already states.

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 states a concrete two-phase scavenger hunt: start with no arguments to receive a run id and riddle, then submit a hyphenated answer to receive a receipt. It explicitly names the sibling tools explain_status and show_id that supply clues, so an agent can distinguish this tool's role from theirs.

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 gives explicit call sequencing: first call with no arguments, then call explain_status and show_id with the run id, then call this tool again with run and answer. It also states a stopping condition ('stop after 12 calls'), leaving no ambiguity about when to invoke it.

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

All Token Tender tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?