Skip to main content
Glama

Appside Developer Docs

submit_index_entry

Submit a web store to the Index for review; does not establish ownership or publish automatically. Pass token or an Authorization: Bearer header on HTTP /mcp. Never publish credentials.

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": {
      "entry": "<entry>"
    },
    "name": "submit_index_entry"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
entryYes
tokenNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description adds meaningful behavior beyond the annotations: submission triggers review, does not establish ownership, does not publish automatically, and supports token or Bearer-header auth. It also gives a credential-safety warning, though it does not describe return behavior or validation outcomes.

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?

The description is front-loaded, efficient, and contains no filler. The purpose, exclusions, auth note, and safety warning are all packed into three tight sentences.

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 submission tool with a required nested `entry` object and no output schema, the description is missing critical guidance about what the entry must contain and what happens after review. It explains auth and submission scope well, but not enough to construct a valid call.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description only clarifies the token parameter by mentioning the Bearer-header alternative. The required nested `entry` object is not described at all, leaving the most important input semantics undocumented.

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 specific verb and resource: submitting a web store to the Index for review. It also distinguishes the action from adjacent workflows by saying it does not establish ownership or publish automatically, which helps separate it from claim/publish siblings.

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?

It gives clear context for when to use the tool: to submit an entry for review rather than to claim ownership or publish. It does not explicitly name an alternative sibling such as submit_mcp_server, but the exclusion guidance is still useful.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources