Skip to main content
Glama

quote social research

native.quote_social_research
DestructiveIdempotent

Return an expiring credit quote for the current studio. Makes no supplier request. The model chooses explicit coverage semantically; public queries are sent to the source unchanged. Supply example_id to quote a media import; use media_item_id from its mediaItems for a particular image or video.

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": {
      "work_id": "<work_id>",
      "arguments": "<arguments>",
      "expected_catalog_version": "<expected_catalog_version>",
      "read_skills": "<read_skills>",
      "request_key": "<request_key>"
    },
    "name": "native.quote_social_research"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
work_idYes
argumentsYes
read_skillsYesExact required native skills and their dependencies, copied from the accepted session bootstrap's skills array. Include only entries in that array. General mcp.* guides and native.{studio}.instructions are guidance, not native skill proofs.
request_keyYes
publication_proposal_idNoFor native Social scheduling, the exact server-approved publication proposal. This identifier cannot confer approval by itself.
expected_catalog_versionYesFor a new session, read a studios/{studio}/native/{pack} child toolset and copy invocation.catalog_version from a native tool descriptor. Do not use the top-level library version. For calls in an existing session, use that session proposal's catalog_version.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description adds context beyond the annotations by stating that no supplier request is made and that the quote expires, which tells an agent this is a pricing step rather than an execution step. It does not reconcile this with destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the agent is left unsure what the quote actually mutates (a credit reservation, an expiring record) or whether quoting twice consumes anything. It also omits any auth/skill-proof requirement implied by the read_skills parameter.

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?

Three sentences, each doing distinct work: what it returns, what it does not do, then the two ID-selection rules. The lead is front-loaded with the purpose. The middle sentence ('The model chooses explicit coverage semantically; public queries are sent to the source unchanged') is the weakest, using jargon that is hard to act on.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not required, and the description correctly focuses on the two branch parameters. For a tool with six top-level parameters, five required, a deeply nested arguments object, and an adjacent sibling with an almost identical name, the definition still leaves the agent guessing about capability/platform semantics and the difference from the '_next' variant.

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?

With 50% schema coverage and a large nested arguments object, the description picks out only example_id and media_item_id, but does so usefully by explaining the derivation path (mediaItems) between them. Core selection parameters such as capability, platform, and the query/filter fields are left entirely to the schema, and the phrase 'the model chooses explicit coverage semantically' is too abstract to guide capability/platform pairing.

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?

The first sentence gives a specific verb and resource ('Return an expiring credit quote for the current studio') and immediately bounds the action with 'Makes no supplier request', which is far more informative than the title 'quote social research'. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the near-identical sibling native.quote_social_research_next, which an agent would need to differentiate by name alone.

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?

The description gives two concrete routing rules: supply example_id to quote a media import, and use media_item_id from its mediaItems for a specific image or video. That is real when-to-use guidance for the media-import path, but there is no guidance on when to use this versus quote_social_research_next, start_social_research, or research_source_capabilities, and no exclusions or prerequisites (e.g., whether a research must already exist).

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