goldseam

Make My Selfie

make_my_selfie

Read-only

Start or continue a person's conversational Selfie interview. Returns the question groupings (Performer's original questions: formal learning, work, life history and the reflective topics), their purposes, the seven Selfie groupings, progress, where to continue, what survives a chat ending, and the package. No document is needed. Send the person's package from an earlier chat to continue it; without one a new interview begins. A person who starts from a career, certification, program or destination instead begins with explore_from_my_selfie and its target; no earlier answer is needed.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "make_my_selfie"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`package`	No	The package the last GoldSeam Selfie answer returned (goldribbon_package_v1 with its selfie_interview part). Keep it for the person and send it back whole; GoldSeam keeps no copy.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limits`	No	What this answer could not do, each { code, statement }
`status`	No	What happened, or needs_attention with a problem
`package`	No	The person's package with the interview; absent when the call could not use it
`problem`	No	When status is needs_attention: code, statement, what_to_do
`contract`	Yes
`guidance`	No
`progress`	No
`statement`	Yes
`continuity`	No
`interview_id`	No
`next_actions`	No
`life_event_keys`	No
`selfie_groupings`	No
`awaiting_response`	No
`where_to_continue`	No
`question_groupings`	No
`needs_clarification`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 3, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds real context beyond that: it clarifies the stateless persistence model (the returned package must be kept and sent back whole, 'GoldSeam keeps no copy'), what survives a chat ending, and where to continue. It stops short of describing error conditions or how progress is computed, which keeps it at a 4 rather than a 5.

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?

The purpose is front-loaded and every sentence is on-topic, but the long enumerated list of return contents (with the jargon-heavy parenthetical on Performer's original questions and the seven groupings) duplicates information already available in the output schema. The dense run-on sentences with semicolons make it harder to scan than it needs to be.

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?

With an output schema present, the description needn't detail return shape, yet it still explains the continuation contract, the stateless package handoff, and the alternate entry path. For a read-only, single-optional-parameter tool this covers what an agent needs, with only minor gaps around failure modes.

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 the single optional 'package' parameter is already documented, so the baseline would be 3. The description nevertheless adds decision-level meaning the schema does not: whether the parameter is present or absent determines continuation versus a brand-new interview, which is the key semantic an agent needs.

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 and resource: 'Start or continue a person's conversational Selfie interview,' and it enumerates what the call returns (question groupings, seven Selfie groupings, progress, continuation point, package). It also explicitly routes a different starting condition to the sibling tool explore_from_my_selfie, so an agent can distinguish the two without reading either schema.

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?

It states the when and the when-not directly: send a package from an earlier chat to continue, omit it to begin fresh, and 'No document is needed' implicitly excludes the document-reading sibling. It names the alternative path (career, certification, program or destination → explore_from_my_selfie with its target) and notes no earlier answer is required there.

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

All goldseam tools Inspect

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.