Lexpad – Vocabulary Notebook & Flashcards

Send feedback to Lexpad

send_feedback

Sends a note from the user to the Lexpad team: a problem, an idea, a question or praise about Lexpad, with an optional category. It is stored with the feedback people send from the app's Settings and read by the team. Only the text, the category and which assistant sent it are kept. Each account may send a few notes a day.

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": {
      "message": "<message>"
    },
    "name": "send_feedback"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`message`	Yes	The user's note to the Lexpad team, in their own words or a summary they approved.
`category`	No	What kind of note it is.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`category`	No
`createdAt`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 31, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With annotations already declaring the write, non-idempotent, non-destructive profile, the description adds substantive context the annotations cannot: the note is persisted and read by a human team, only text/category/sending assistant are retained (a data-minimization disclosure), and there is a per-account daily send limit. Rate limits and data retention are exactly the details an agent needs before invoking.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Three sentences, front-loaded with the action and recipient before flowing into context, and no sentence is padding. The Settings-comparison clause is slightly more wordy than needed, but it earns its place by explaining where the data lands.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the description covers what the remaining gaps would be for a submit-style tool: persistence, retention scope, audience, and rate limiting. An agent has everything required to decide and call 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and both properties carry their own descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description restates that the category is optional and matches its values to the note kinds, but adds no format, length, or content rules beyond what the schema already supplies (e.g. maxLength 2000).

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?

"Sends a note from the user to the Lexpad team" states a concrete verb and recipient, and the enumeration (problem, idea, question, praise) pins down exactly what kind of content this tool carries. It is unmistakably distinct from every sibling tool (add_word, record_answer, etc.), none of which handle free-form user-to-team messages.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description makes the purpose clear enough that usage is implied, and it notes the category is optional, but it never states a when/when-not condition or points at any alternative channel for feedback. No explicit exclusions or prerequisites are given, so an agent must infer that this is the route for any user commentary.

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

All Lexpad – Vocabulary Notebook & Flashcards 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?