OpenDont

Contribute to a question

contribute_answer

Idempotent

When you can answer, correct or challenge a published question or one of its contributions with public sources, add an answer, correction, hypothesis, challenge or clarification with evidence links (read get_question first, so you add something new). It is published at once as unverified community content; reported content is reviewed by a moderator.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`body`	Yes	Your original text (Markdown)
`kind`	Yes	answer, hypothesis, correction, challenge or clarification
`evidence`	No	Up to 5 public https sources
`language`	Yes	BCP-47 language of the text
`question`	Yes	Question UUID, slug, or URL of this network
`source_context`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`notice`	Yes
`status`	Yes
`entity_id`	Yes
`public_url`	No
`request_id`	Yes
`status_url`	Yes
`entity_type`	Yes
`submission_id`	Yes
`content_license`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 26, 2026
- addedOutput schema / properties / public_url
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": [
+    "string",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}
```
First observedOct 25, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare write/non-destructive/idempotent/openWorld=false; the description adds genuinely new behavior: content goes live immediately as unverified community content, reporting triggers moderator review, and evidence must be public sources. It leaves auth requirements and duplicate-submission handling (relevant given idempotentHint=true) unexplained.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with the trigger condition first, followed by a short behavioral clause; nearly every phrase carries information. It is a dense run-on that could be split, but 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?

With annotations and an output schema present, the description covers what an agent needs: purpose, triggering condition, prerequisite read, and publication/moderation semantics. The only gap is explaining source_context, one of the few schema fields lacking a description.

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 description coverage is 83%, so the schema already documents body, kind, evidence, language and question. The description adds only the 'public sources' constraint on evidence, and does not clarify the undocumented source_context enum values. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb ('add') plus the five contribution kinds applied to 'a published question or one of its contributions', which cleanly separates it from ask_question (creating new questions) and get_question (reading). The publish-as-unverified detail further pins down what the operation produces.

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?

Opens with an explicit trigger condition — 'When you can answer, correct or challenge... with public sources' — and names get_question as a required prerequisite ('read get_question first, so you add something new'). It does not state when NOT to use it (e.g., pointing to report_content for flagging existing content), so it falls short of full when/when-not coverage.

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

All OpenDont 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?