Skip to main content
Glama

Immersive Commons

by com.immersivecommons

What photos you have handed in, and what happened to them

ic_hack_photos_mine

Your own photo submissions at this event, in every state, newest first. This is the honest answer to whether a photo made it: published is in the gallery, pending is still with an organiser, rejected was declined (with review_note when they left one), and hidden was up and has since been pulled. A submission that never appears in the gallery is NOT a failure to report — check here before re-submitting, because handing the same frame in twice makes more work for the person reviewing it. Args: { eid? }. Returns: { ok, eid, count, photos[] }. Required scope: hack:submit (any tier).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
eidNo

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description adds meaningful behavioral detail beyond the annotations: required scope hack:submit, the meaning of each status, the existence of review_note on rejections, and the fact that absence from the gallery is not a failure to report. It does not explicitly state whether the call has side effects, and readOnlyHint is false, but nothing in the description contradicts the annotations.

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?

The description is dense but every sentence contributes: purpose, status meanings, a critical resubmission warning, args, return shape, and required scope. The most important behavioral guidance is front-loaded, and there is no filler.

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 single optional-parameter read-style tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, return shape, status semantics, and authorization. The main missing piece is a clear definition of eid and a bit more detail about the photo objects returned, leaving it slightly short of fully complete.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden for explaining eid. It only echoes 'Args: { eid? }' without clarifying that eid is an event identifier, how it filters results, or when it should be omitted. This is a meaningful gap for agents.

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 states a specific verb and resource: it lists the caller's own photo submissions in every state at the event. It clearly distinguishes itself from gallery or review tools by emphasizing 'your own' and 'every state, newest first.' The status vocabulary makes the purpose unmistakable.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance: check here before re-submitting, and use it as the authoritative way to know whether a photo made it into the gallery. It does not name sibling alternatives explicitly, but the 'your own' framing and the warning about duplicate submissions provide clear context for when this tool is appropriate.

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

All Immersive Commons toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools are clearly scoped to distinct actions (e.g., ic_hack_apply vs. ic_hack_register, ic_rooms_create vs. ic_rooms_join). A few pairs could confuse an agent: floor10_submit_highlight vs. floorcast_push both submit HighlightStories but to different queues, and ic_directory_search / ic_agent_directory_lookup / ic_admin_list_members overlap in searching members. Overall, the long descriptions help disambiguate, but the volume requires careful reading.

Naming Consistency3/5

The dominant pattern is ic_<domain>_<verb>_<object> (e.g., ic_admin_list_pending_events, ic_headsets_checkout), but there are notable deviations: floor10_* and floorcast_* prefixes break the ic_ convention, and a few tools use noun-style names (ic_health, ic_capabilities, ic_donations_total). Verb placement also varies (get_* vs *_get, e.g., ic_get_my_membership vs. ic_membership_set_profile). Still, most names are readable and predictable.

Tool Count1/5

175 tools is an extreme count for a single MCP server, far beyond the 50+ threshold that indicates an unwieldy surface. While the platform covers many domains (events, files, hackathon, headsets, prints, rooms, etc.), bundling everything into one server makes discovery and selection difficult. This would be better split into several narrowly-scoped servers.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers nearly every lifecycle for each domain: CRUD for files/folders, full hackathon admissions and judging, headset lending with waivers and incidents, print farm submission and handoffs, and room coordination. Minor gaps exist: no delete for files/folders, no cancel for events, and some actions (like revoking a Z.ai key or tearing down a room) are explicitly left to human console use. Overall, the surface is remarkably comprehensive for the stated scope.

Resources