Skip to main content
Glama

Lovie Company Formation

by co.lovie
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Claim Demo Formations

formation_claim_demo_formations

ClaimDemoFormations reassigns formations created during a demo session (under a hardcoded demo user) to a newly-signed-up real user. This is a cross-user mutation; the server enforces reviewer/admin/service role.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toUserIdYesUUID value wrapper.
sessionIdYesUUID value wrapper.
fromUserIdYesUUID value wrapper.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
claimedNo
formationIdNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / formationId / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "description": "UUID value wrapper.",
+    "properties": {
+      "value": {
+        "format": "uuid",
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
    • removedOutput schema / properties / formationId / description
      Removed value: -"UUID value wrapper."
    • removedOutput schema / properties / formationId / properties
      Removed value: -{
-  "value": {
-    "format": "uuid",
-    "type": "string"
-  }
-}
    • removedOutput schema / properties / formationId / type
      Removed value: -"object"
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only provide openWorldHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the description carries the burden of explaining the mutation. It explicitly discloses that this is a cross-user mutation, that it reassigns ownership, and that the server enforces reviewer/admin/service role. This goes beyond the annotations and warns the agent about the sensitive nature of the 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?

Two sentences with no filler. The core action and the critical caveat (cross-user mutation, role enforcement) are front-loaded, and every clause adds information.

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?

The description is complete for a mutation tool with a clear purpose, three well-documented parameters, and an output schema. It explains the demo-to-real-user flow and the role restriction. It could mention what happens to the formations after reassignment or any side effects, but the essential information for calling the tool correctly is present.

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%, so the schema already documents all three parameters as UUID value wrappers. The description adds context about the roles of the parameters (fromUserId is the demo user, toUserId is the real user, sessionId identifies the demo session) but does not provide detailed semantics beyond what the schema and description together imply. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('reassigns') and names the exact resource ('formations created during a demo session under a hardcoded demo user') and the target ('a newly-signed-up real user'). It clearly distinguishes this from the many formation_* siblings by describing a unique cross-user claim operation.

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?

The description explains the context in which the tool is used (after a demo session, when a real user signs up) and notes the server-enforced role requirement. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, but the unique purpose makes the usage context clear.

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

All Lovie Company Formation toolsInspect
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