AI Design Blueprint

Submit Feedback

signals.feedback

Public — records explicit free-text user feedback about the Blueprint, this tool surface, or a specific principle/example. Captures category (bug, doctrine_critique, missing_example, ergonomics, other), free-text body, and optional contact_email when permission_to_follow_up is true. WHEN TO CALL: ONLY when the user explicitly says they want to give feedback (e.g. 'can you log this as feedback', 'file this critique', 'send a bug report'). Use signals.report instead for value-moment metrics (rating validate's output 1-5). WHEN NOT TO CALL: proactively, silently, or to substitute for signals.report. Never harvest contact info without explicit permission_to_follow_up=true. BEHAVIOR: write-only, no auth required (open to all callers). Stores one feedback record, at rest under UK/EU residency. contact_email is stored ONLY when permission_to_follow_up=true, and that fact is confirmed back in the response so the user can see the privacy boundary. When permission_to_follow_up=true AND a valid contact_email is given, and only then, it also opens a support inbox item so a human can reply, and the free-text fields are sent to OpenAI for triage (severity and a short summary). The contact_email field is never part of that request, so keep personal data out of the free text. In every other case nothing leaves the server.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`surface`	No	Which Blueprint surface the feedback is about. Use 'mcp' if the session was via Claude Code or another MCP client. Use 'principles', 'examples', 'guides', 'coaching', or 'validation' based on what the user interacted with.
`task_type`	No	What the user was doing when they decided to give feedback. Use plain English — e.g. 'code-review', 'architecture-design', 'agent-setup', 'onboarding', 'validation'. Infer from context.
`what_helped`	No	Ask the user: 'What was most helpful?' Record their answer verbatim or paraphrased in plain English. Max 1000 chars. No code snippets, no proprietary content.
`what_missing`	No	Ask the user: 'What was missing or could be improved?' Record their answer verbatim or paraphrased. Max 1000 chars.
`contact_email`	No	Only ask for this if the user explicitly says they want a follow-up response. Never prompt for email unprompted. Only stored when permission_to_follow_up=true.
`rating_clarity`	No	Ask the user: 'How clear was the Blueprint guidance? Rate 1–5.' 1 = very unclear, 5 = very clear. Only set if the user gives an explicit number.
`would_use_again`	No	Ask the user: 'Would you use the Blueprint again for a similar task?' Set true/false based on their answer. Only set if they answer explicitly.
`rating_usefulness`	No	Ask the user: 'How useful was the Blueprint for this task? Rate 1–5.' 1 = not useful, 5 = very useful. Only set if the user gives an explicit number.
`permission_to_follow_up`	No	Set to true only if the user explicitly said they want a follow-up. Must be confirmed before storing contact_email.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedMay 9, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "title": "submit_feedbackDictOutput",
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedMay 9, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -{
-  "$defs": {
-    "ErrorBody": {
-      "description": "The body of `error_payload(code, message, details)` returns.",
-      "properties": {
-        "code": {
-          "title": "Code",
-          "type": "string"
-        },
-        "details": {
-          "additionalProperties": true,
-          "title": "Details",
-          "type": "object"
-        },
-        "message": {
-          "title": "Message",
-          "type": "string"
-        }
-      },
-      "title": "ErrorBody",
-      "type": "object"
-    }
-  },
-  "properties": {
-    "deduplicated": {
-      "default": null,
-      "title": "Deduplicated",
-      "type": "boolean"
-    },
-    "error": {
-      "$ref": "#/$defs/ErrorBody",
-      "default": null
-    },
-    "event_id": {
-      "default": null,
-      "title": "Event Id",
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "event_type": {
-      "default": null,
-      "title": "Event Type",
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "guidance": {
-      "default": null,
-      "title": "Guidance",
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "status": {
-      "default": null,
-      "title": "Status",
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "surface_used": {
-      "default": null,
-      "title": "Surface Used",
-      "type": "string"
-    }
-  },
-  "title": "SignalsResponse",
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null

Changed1 schema field changedMay 8, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$defs": {
+    "ErrorBody": {
+      "description": "The body of `error_payload(code, message, details)` returns.",
+      "properties": {
+        "code": {
+          "title": "Code",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "details": {
+          "additionalProperties": true,
+          "title": "Details",
+          "type": "object"
+        },
+        "message": {
+          "title": "Message",
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "title": "ErrorBody",
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "properties": {
+    "deduplicated": {
+      "default": null,
+      "title": "Deduplicated",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "error": {
+      "$ref": "#/$defs/ErrorBody",
+      "default": null
+    },
+    "event_id": {
+      "default": null,
+      "title": "Event Id",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "event_type": {
+      "default": null,
+      "title": "Event Type",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "guidance": {
+      "default": null,
+      "title": "Guidance",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "default": null,
+      "title": "Status",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "surface_used": {
+      "default": null,
+      "title": "Surface Used",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "title": "SignalsResponse",
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedMay 1, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description adds rich behavioral disclosure beyond the sparse annotations: write-only, no auth required, single feedback record stored under UK/EU residency, contact_email stored only with explicit permission and confirmed back to the user, support inbox creation and OpenAI triage only when permission plus a valid email are present, and personal data excluded from the OpenAI request. This aligns with readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=false and gives the agent a clear safety profile.

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?

The description is well-structured with labeled WHEN/BEHAVIOR sections and front-loads the core purpose. It is fairly long and repeats the permission_to_follow_up condition multiple times, and the 'category (bug, doctrine_critique, ...)' list does not correspond to any input-schema field, adding noise. Still, most sentences carry useful guidance for an agent.

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?

Given nine optional parameters, an output schema, and the sensitive data-handling behavior, the description is complete: it covers when to call, when not to call, auth, storage residency, follow-up workflow, privacy boundaries, and the sibling to prefer instead. The category/free-text mismatch is a terminology issue rather than a missing capability, and the output schema covers return-value details.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaningful semantics: the conditional relationship between permission_to_follow_up and contact_email, the rule that contact_email never leaves with the OpenAI triage request, and the instruction to keep personal data out of the free-text fields. It doesn't enumerate each parameter, but it clarifies the privacy-sensitive interactions that the schema alone states more tersely.

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: 'records explicit free-text user feedback about the Blueprint, this tool surface, or a specific principle/example.' It also explicitly contrasts this tool with signals.report by distinguishing feedback capture from value-moment metrics, so an agent can tell the siblings apart without inspecting schemas. The only minor wrinkle is the mention of a 'category' and 'free-text body' that don't map cleanly to the schema's actual fields, but the overall purpose is unambiguous.

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 'WHEN TO CALL' and 'WHEN NOT TO CALL' sections are explicit: call only when the user explicitly requests feedback capture, use signals.report for 1-5 value-moment ratings, and never call proactively, silently, or as a substitute for the sibling. It also states a hard privacy rule about permission_to_follow_up before collecting contact info, which is exactly the kind of conditional an agent needs.

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

All AI Design Blueprint 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?