Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

GenFlick

by com.genflick
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

read social example

native.read_social_example
DestructiveIdempotent

Read an exact observed example, public evidence, missing fields and any owned Library reference.

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.read_social_example"
  }
}

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

C2.2/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

The description frames the call purely as a read ('Read an exact observed example'), while annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true with openWorldHint=true. That mismatch hides safety-relevant behavior: nothing warns that the call is not a passive read or what it may destroy/modify. It also omits the session prerequisites implied by read_skills and expected_catalog_version.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

One short front-loaded sentence with no filler, which is good. But its compressed enumeration ('missing fields and any owned Library reference') is ambiguous rather than informative, so brevity comes at the cost of comprehension.

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

Completeness2/5

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

An output schema exists, so return contents need not be spelled out, but the tool is otherwise complex: nested arguments, a required skills array tied to a session bootstrap, and a catalog-version requirement. The description says nothing about these prerequisites or about the destructive/non-read-only behavior, leaving an agent under-equipped to call it safely.

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?

Six parameters, five required, with only 50% schema description coverage, and the description explains none of them. It never mentions example_id (the nested selector inside 'arguments'), work_id, request_key, or why publication_proposal_id is conditionally relevant, so it fails to compensate for the undocumented half of the schema.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The verb and resource are present ('Read an exact observed example'), and the enumeration of public evidence, missing fields and an owned Library reference hints at what a social example record contains. However, 'social example' is never defined and the sentence reads more like a list of returned fields than a statement of purpose. Nothing distinguishes it from neighbors such as native.save_social_example, native.read_social_research or native.read_research_page.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no when-to-use guidance, no precondition, and no named alternative, despite a large sibling set containing several plausible substitutes (read_social_research, read_resource, get_social_publication). The agent has to infer the trigger condition entirely from the tool name.

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

All GenFlick 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