Skip to main content
Glama

Inclusify Accessibility

by com.inclusifyapp

Choose which Slack channel this site's alerts post to

set_slack_channel
DestructiveIdempotent

Use this when the user wants accessibility alerts for a site to go to a Slack channel, or to a different one than now. WRITES to this website's Inclusify configuration, never to the site itself. It CANNOT install Slack: that is a browser OAuth flow on the Inclusify panel's Integrations page and no assistant can do it, so this refuses until the workspace is connected. It also cannot list channels — ask the user for the channel, by name or by Slack channel ID. NOTE THAT THIS POSTS A MESSAGE to the channel before saving, on purpose: a binding that looks right and posts nowhere is worse than a refusal, because the customer believes they are covered. If the post fails — wrong channel, private channel the app was never invited to — nothing is saved and the reason is returned. REQUIRES CONFIRMATION, because it both writes to their Slack and redirects where alerts go. Changing the channel keeps the existing notification settings; only a first-time binding takes the defaults. Use set_slack_events to change which alerts fire. Needs the PRO plan, matching the panel.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
channelYesThe Slack channel: an ID like "C01ABCDEF" or a name like "#accessibility". A name is passed to Slack as given — if the app cannot reach it, the call is refused and nothing is saved.
confirmNoLeave this out on the first call to get a preview of exactly what would change, plus a confirmation token. Call again with the same arguments and that token to apply the change. The token lasts 10 minutes and works once.
websiteYesThe website domain as registered in Inclusify, e.g. "example.com".

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark this as readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, and idempotentHint=true. The description goes far beyond those: it discloses that it WRITES to configuration, deliberately POSTS a test message before saving, explains failure semantics (if post fails, nothing is saved and reason returned), requires confirmation, and notes the PRO plan requirement. It also explains that first-time binding uses defaults while subsequent changes keep settings. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

The description is long but every sentence carries functional weight: usage trigger, write target, cannot-do limitations, deliberate post behavior, failure handling, confirmation requirement, settings preservation, sibling pointer, and plan requirement. It's front-loaded with the primary purpose and then methodically covers constraints. Slightly verbose but not padded; a more compact version would risk losing nuance.

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?

For a tool with three parameters, no output schema, and no nested objects, this description is exceptionally complete. It covers when to call, prerequisites (Slack connected, PRO plan), interaction flow (ask for channel, confirmation token), failure behavior, side effects, and relationship to a sibling. An agent would know exactly how to invoke this correctly and what to inform the user about.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and each parameter already has a clear description. The tool description adds meaningful context: channel names are passed exactly as given and will cause refusal if unreachable; the confirm token is a two-step flow with a 10-minute validity and single-use; website must be registered in Inclusify. This goes beyond the bare schema, though most of the parameter meaning is already in the schema.

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 clear, specific purpose: 'Use this when the user wants accessibility alerts for a site to go to a Slack channel, or to a different one than now.' It distinguishes itself from the sibling set_slack_events by explicitly stating it controls the destination, not the event types. It also clarifies the resource (Inclusify configuration, not the site) and the side effect (writes to config, posts to Slack).

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance ('when the user wants accessibility alerts for a site to go to a Slack channel...') and clear exclusions: it cannot install Slack (must already be connected), cannot list channels (agent must ask the user), and requires confirmation. It also points to the alternative: 'Use set_slack_events to change which alerts fire.' This leaves no ambiguity about selection.

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

All Inclusify Accessibility 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

A4.3/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

The descriptions do exceptional cross-referencing work, explicitly separating near-neighbor pairs (add_website vs add_domain, list_alt_findings vs check_page_alt_text, plan_options vs billing_link, widget_status vs widget_usage). A few clusters remain that an agent could confuse without reading carefully, notably site_overview vs compliance_status (both report statement existence and scan-record state) and crawl_summary vs list_monitored_pages vs site_overview (all touch coverage numbers). Overall, distinct purposes are clearly delineated despite the large surface.

Naming Consistency4/5

All names are lowercase snake_case with strong family patterns: list_* (5 tools), add_* (3), set_* (7), plus org_* and *_history pairs. The main inconsistency is the mix of verb-led names (list_violations, set_slack_channel, start_crawl) with noun-led read names (site_overview, compliance_status, widget_usage, next_steps), but the noun-led names follow a coherent 'what it returns' vocabulary (status, summary, history, overview, rollup). Minor deviations rather than chaos.

Tool Count3/5

36 tools is heavy and sits above the 25-tool threshold where agent navigation starts to degrade, but the server covers a genuinely broad domain: website lifecycle, monitoring, four finding types, four live-audit tools, seven config setters, org rollups, billing, and CI. Most tools earn their place and none are duplicates, but several could plausibly be merged (set_slack_channel/set_slack_events/set_monitoring_settings into one notifications tool; list_violations/list_alt_findings/list_content_findings with a filter). The count is on the edge of unwieldy for an agent's tool-selection step.

Completeness3/5

The read/audit/analysis side is rich and well-covered: findings, history, live checks, org rollups, coverage, and validation all have tools. However, the write side is one-directional: add_monitored_pages is explicitly add-only, and there is no remove_website, remove_domain, or remove_monitored_pages, so teardown and 'stop monitoring this page' requests hit dead ends that the descriptions acknowledge belong to the panel. Statement content writing and widget installation are also panel/browser-only by design, which is documented but still leaves those operations outside the agent's reach.

Resources