OohWeGo

Report a bug

report_bug

Reports a bug in OohWeGo to its team, as the user, in the community forum (staff see an AI app filed it), after searching the community for it: what happened, the steps that make it happen, and what was expected.

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": {
      "title": "<title>",
      "body": "<body>",
      "steps": "<steps>"
    },
    "name": "report_bug"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`body`	Yes	What happened, in Markdown
`steps`	Yes	The steps that make it happen, in order
`title`	Yes	What goes wrong, in a few words
`expected`	No	What should have happened
`frequency`	No	How often it happens

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`post`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 4, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false), the description discloses who is attributed ("as the user") and how staff perceive the filing ("staff see an AI app filed it"), plus that it lands in the community forum — meaningful disclosure for a non-destructive create. It omits volume/rate behavior and what happens on a duplicate filing.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and destination, and the parenthetical about staff perception carries real information rather than filler. The trailing colon-list makes the sentence dense and slightly awkward to parse, but nothing is genuinely redundant.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the annotations cover the safety profile. The description adds the two things structured fields cannot convey — the search-first prerequisite and the attribution/visibility model — leaving only minor gaps around duplicate handling.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and each field already carries its own description, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description's recap of "what happened, the steps..., and what was expected" adds no meaning beyond what the properties already state, and it ignores the optional frequency parameter entirely.

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 description opens with a specific verb and resource ("Reports a bug in OohWeGo") and adds scope detail about where it lands and who sees it. It partially differentiates from siblings by tying itself to a prior community search, though it never names the tools it is not (e.g. suggest_idea) by name.

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?

The clause "after searching the community for it" establishes a clear precondition before filing, which is real when-to-use guidance. It stops short of explicit exclusions — an agent with an OohWeGo feature idea has to infer that suggest_idea is the right sibling rather than this tool.

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

All OohWeGo 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.

Resources

Need Help?