Tulina

oto_admin_guide

[ADMIN] Another org's guide, by org_id (cross-org = platform admin). op=get (slug = one skill, none = base+index; scope=group) / list (named guides incl. base) / set (write: omit slug = base; from_version restores; slots = required entities ADR 0035) / delete (exact slug, drops history).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "op": "<op>",
      "org_id": "<org_id>"
    },
    "name": "oto_admin_guide"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`op`	Yes
`_org`	No
`full`	No
`slug`	No
`query`	No
`scope`	No
`slots`	No
`title`	No
`org_id`	Yes
`body_md`	No
`verbose`	No
`version`	No
`description`	No
`from_version`	No
`with_history`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

No schema history has been recorded yet.

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose meaningful behavior ('delete ... drops history', 'set' is a write, from_version restores), which is valuable. But it omits permissions/auth requirements for cross-org access, reversibility beyond from_version, and what most parameters (full, query, verbose, with_history, version, title, body_md) do.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

It is front-loaded with the [ADMIN] tag and packs real information, but the slash-delimited run-on format is dense and hard to parse quickly. Every clause is relevant, yet readability suffers from cramming four ops into one sentence.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a 15-parameter, four-op mutation-capable admin tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers op semantics but leaves a large majority of parameters undocumented and omits return/response behavior. It is not complete enough for reliable invocation across ops.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0% across 15 parameters. The description explains slug, scope, from_version, slots and op, but leaves many parameters (full, query, verbose, with_history, version, title, body_md, description, _org) with no meaning anywhere. For a 15-param tool with no schema descriptions, this is insufficient compensation.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description names the resource (another org's guide) and the access context ([ADMIN], cross-org = platform admin), and the op enumeration distinguishes the four actions. It is distinguishable from oto_guide/oto_guide_v2 by the explicit cross-org admin framing, though it never names those siblings directly.

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?

Each op carries a condition: get with slug = one skill, none = base+index, scope=group; list = named guides incl. base; set = write with from_version restore; delete = exact slug. This is clear when-to-use guidance internal to the tool, but it gives no explicit rule for choosing this over the non-admin guide siblings.

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

All Tulina tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?