Skip to main content
Glama

Get a personality test spec (administer inline)

get_test_spec
Read-only

Fetch a complete, self-contained test specification as Markdown: full item list, response scale, scoring algorithm, and the mapping from result to tuning slug. Administer the items to the user inline (bulk-paste is fine), score per the algorithm, then call get_tuning. Tests: mbti (OEJTS, 32 items, ~5 min), enneagram (OEPS, 36, ~5 min), disc (ODAT, 16, ~3 min), attachment (ECR-R, 36, ~5 min), big-five (IPIP-50, 50, ~7 min → maps to ocean files).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
testYesWhich test instrument.

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Description details what the specification contains (items, scales, algorithm, mapping) and the intended usage flow. Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, which is consistent. Adds context about return format and next steps.

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 pack the purpose, content details, and usage guidance efficiently. Front-loaded with core action.

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?

For a simple single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description fully explains what it returns, how to use it, and what to do next. No gaps.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema has 100% coverage with a single 'test' enum. Description enriches by listing each test with item count and duration, providing practical context beyond the enum values.

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 clearly states 'Fetch a complete, self-contained test specification as Markdown' and specifies the content. It distinguishes from sibling tools by describing the follow-up action (call get_tuning).

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?

Explicitly instructs to administer items inline, score per algorithm, then call get_tuning. Lists tests with details (item counts, duration) to help choose and plan.

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.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: retrieving a test specification, listing available tunings, and fetching a specific tuning file. No overlap or ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent 'verb_noun' pattern using snake_case (get_test_spec, get_tuning, list_tunings), making them predictable and easy to understand.

Tool Count5/5

With 3 tools, the server is tightly scoped to its personality tuning domain. Each tool serves a necessary function without redundancy or excess.

Completeness5/5

The tools cover the complete workflow: retrieve a test spec, list tunings to find the matching slug, and fetch the tuning file. The description includes clear instructions for scoring and installation, leaving no gaps.