Skip to main content
Glama

ClockInToday: No-Interview Jobs

Get one platform's requirements

get_platform
Read-onlyIdempotent

Full requirements and pay terms for one platform (e.g. DoorDash, Instacart, BioLife Plasma), with the source pages each value came from.

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "get_platform"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesPlatform name or slug, e.g. 'DoorDash' or 'uber-eats'

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully adds that results include provenance ('the source pages each value came from'), which is real behavioral context beyond annotations, but says nothing about error behavior for unknown platform names or result size.

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?

A single well-formed sentence that front-loads the resource and value delivered, then notes provenance. No filler or redundancy.

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?

For a one-parameter read tool with rich annotations and no output schema, this is nearly complete; the mention of source-page provenance helps set return expectations. A note on what happens when the platform is not found would round it out.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already documents the 'name' parameter with slug examples. The description's examples (DoorDash, Instacart, BioLife Plasma) largely duplicate what the schema conveys, adding only marginal meaning beyond it.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific resource ('Full requirements and pay terms for one platform') with a clear singular scope and concrete examples. The contrast with search_platforms is only implied by 'one platform', not stated explicitly, so it falls short of full sibling differentiation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Singular lookup by name implies this is the detail-fetch counterpart to search_platforms, but no alternative is named and no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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.

Resources