Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Analyzera

by com.analyzera
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Send feedback to the Analyzera team

send_feedback

Send the Analyzera team a bug report or feature request, by email.

The text is sent as written, with the sender recorded automatically. Returns a reference for the report.

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": {
      "message": "<message>"
    },
    "name": "send_feedback"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
messageYesThe user's report, in words they agreed to.
categoryNoother
person_idNoThe id of one person, family or entity this login holds. Omit for everything this login holds.
tool_nameNo
portfolio_idNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
referenceYesThe reference the team can find this report by.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=false). The description adds genuinely new facts: the text is transmitted verbatim without editing, the sender is attributed automatically, and a reference is returned. It does not say whether sending is retractable or rate-limited, which keeps it from a 5.

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 short sentences plus one line on behavior, all front-loaded with the action and channel first. No filler, and the return-value note is placed after the core purpose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The core action is fully specified and an output schema exists so the return reference needs no elaboration. However, for a 5-parameter tool where three parameters are undocumented in both schema and description, the agent is left guessing whether to attach a person, portfolio, or tool context to the report.

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 coverage is only 40% across 5 parameters, and the description addresses none of the optional ones — category, tool_name, portfolio_id are never mentioned, and person_id's scoping role is left entirely to the schema. Only the message parameter is implicitly covered by 'the text is sent as written', so the description fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

States a specific verb and resource — send a bug report or feature request to the Analyzera team by email — which no sibling tool in the list does. An agent can immediately distinguish this from the portfolio/simulation/strategy tools.

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 trigger condition is clear: use this when there is a bug report or feature request to relay to the team. There are no exclusions or named alternatives, but the sibling list contains nothing comparable, so the guidance is effectively unambiguous.

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

All Analyzera 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