Skip to main content
Glama

DevReply

by com.devreply
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Tag a conversation

tag_conversation
Idempotent

Adds or removes tags on a conversation, for the team (the user doesn't see them), e.g. feature:sentence_builder, churn, bug:export. Lowercase letters, digits and _ - : . up to 32 characters, 10 per conversation. Filter with list_conversations(tag); see them all with list_tags.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
addNoTags to add, e.g. ["churn", "feature:export"]. Lowercase a-z 0-9 _ - : ., up to 32 characters.
removeNoTags to remove, e.g. ["churn", "feature:export"]. Lowercase a-z 0-9 _ - : ., up to 32 characters.
conversation_idYesThe conversation's id (from list_conversations or get_user).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tagsYesIts tags now.
conversation_idYesThe conversation.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / add / description
      Added value: +"Tags to add, e.g. [\"churn\", \"feature:export\"]. Lowercase a-z 0-9 _ - : ., up to 32 characters."
    • addedInput schema / properties / conversation_id / description
      Added value: +"The conversation's id (from list_conversations or get_user)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / remove / description
      Added value: +"Tags to remove, e.g. [\"churn\", \"feature:export\"]. Lowercase a-z 0-9 _ - : ., up to 32 characters."
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "conversation_id": {
+      "description": "The conversation.",
+      "format": "uuid",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "tags": {
+      "description": "Its tags now.",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "conversation_id",
+    "tags"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, so the bar is lower. The description still adds meaningful context beyond that: tags are invisible to the end user, constrained to lowercase letters/digits/_-:. up to 32 chars, and capped at 10 per conversation.

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?

A single dense paragraph that front-loads the core action, then constraints, then navigation to sibling tools. No filler, though the character-class and length rules are duplicated from the schema, which is slightly redundant.

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?

With a full output schema, return values need no explanation. The description covers purpose, scope, format limits, visibility semantics, and the two relevant sibling tools, leaving nothing an agent needs missing for correct invocation.

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 add, remove, and conversation_id with examples and format rules. The description largely restates those constraints (character set, length, count), which is helpful reinforcement but adds little beyond the structured fields; baseline 3 is correct.

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 pair and resource ('Adds or removes tags on a conversation') and immediately scopes the concept as team-internal tags the user never sees. An agent can distinguish this from siblings like add_note or set_category without opening any schema.

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?

It explicitly routes to alternatives: filter with list_conversations(tag) and enumerate with list_tags. It gives clear context but no explicit 'do not use this for X' exclusion, so it falls just short of a 5.

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

All DevReply 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