Skip to main content
Glama

asksteps

by co.asksteps

asksteps: list the ready-made form templates

asksteps_list_templates
Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists the ready-made templates that ship with asksteps — contact form, quote request, callback and so on. Prefer starting from one of these over building a form from nothing: a template brings its design and its success page along, which the plain form structure cannot describe. Pass the id to asksteps_create_from_template, then change the texts with asksteps_update_form.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeNoRestrict to "form" (a flat multi-step form) or "funnel" (one question at a time). Omit for both.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
noteYesOne sentence for the user.
statusYesOutcome. One of: "ok", "unavailable".
templatesNoThe ready-made templates shipped with the product.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful domain context about templates, but it does not disclose runtime details such as pagination, ordering, or whether the list includes both form and funnel templates; this is adequate but not rich for a simple list operation.

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 three focused sentences: the first states the purpose, the second gives the reason to use it, and the third explains the follow-up workflow. It is front-loaded and contains no filler.

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?

With a fully documented schema, an output schema, and read-only/idempotent annotations, nothing needed to invoke the tool correctly is missing. The description also explains why templates are preferred and what to do with the returned id, making the invocation flow complete.

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?

The only optional parameter 'type' is fully documented in the schema with 100% coverage, so the description does not need to repeat it. The description adds no param-specific meaning, but the schema already handles that burden.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Lists the ready-made templates that ship with asksteps' and gives concrete examples like contact form and quote request. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like asksteps_list_forms by focusing on shipped ready-made templates rather than user-created forms.

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?

The description explicitly says to prefer starting from a template over building a form from nothing and explains why: a template brings its design and success page. It also names the downstream workflow: pass the id to asksteps_create_from_template, then adjust texts with asksteps_update_form.

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

All asksteps 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

A4.3/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Tools are mostly distinct with clear ownership of each resource and action, and descriptions explicitly contrast sibling pairs (analyze_pdf vs import_pdf, create_form vs create_funnel, publish_form vs update_publication, change_plan vs start_checkout). However, an agent skimming names alone could misselect between the four creation tools or the two PDF tools without reading the descriptions carefully.

Naming Consistency5/5

Every tool follows the asksteps_<verb>_<noun> pattern perfectly, with uniform verbs like get_, list_, create_, and update_. The only slight deviation is create_from_template, but even that stays predictable and readable within the convention.

Tool Count3/5

At 24 tools, this sits at the heavy end of the 16-25 borderline range. The broad domain (form/funnel building, publishing, PDF import, billing, stats, leads) justifies most of them and there is no obvious redundancy, but the sheer volume makes navigation harder than a tighter set.

Completeness4/5

The core form and funnel lifecycle is well covered: multiple creation paths, read, full replacement update, delete with confirmation, publish/unpublish, stats, and leads export. Billing covers first purchase, plan changes, and quota checks. Minor gaps exist — no dedicated subdomain listing tool, no funnel-specific stats, and no programmatic PDF field mapping — but these are explicitly documented as human steps, so agents can work around them.

Resources