Skip to main content
Glama

Pick My Secret Santa

Plan a Secret Santa setup

plan_secret_santa_setup
Read-onlyIdempotent

Configures a Secret Santa group of 3 to 30 right here in chat and hands the organizer one pre-filled link to pickmysecretsanta.com, where the zero-knowledge draw runs in their browser - no server sees the matches, and each match will live inside one private link - hidden from plain sight, not locked. Give it the group's names and, optionally, a group name, a budget band, and keep_apart pairs (two-name lists, like [["Ana", "Ben"]], for people who must not draw each other): it validates the setup (3 to 30 people, no shared names - the site's draw cannot tell two same-named people apart) and checks that a valid draw exists under the keep-apart pairs before it returns the link with the group, names, budget, and pairs already in the form, plus the site's honest warnings; if the pairs leave no fair draw, it names the conflict plainly and returns no link. The link carries setup only - nobody has been assigned anyone. Names are used once to build the link and are never stored. With only a headcount (group_size) and no names, it instead returns the setup checklist the site prescribes: what to agree out loud first (buy-by date, what counts as a gift, the late-joiner rule, the reveal), the budget step, and how the browser draw works.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
namesNoEvery player's name, one per person (3 to 30). Names must be distinct - add a last initial where two people share a name. When names are given, the tool returns the pre-filled setup link.
budgetNoLegacy alias for budget_band.
group_nameNoOptional group name, up to 40 characters (for example "The Office Crew").
group_sizeNoHow many people, 3 to 30 - for the checklist when no names are given.
keep_apartNoPairs who must not draw each other, as two-name lists using names from the names list, e.g. [["Ana", "Ben"]].
budget_bandNoThe group's budget band, if already picked.
has_keep_apart_pairsNoChecklist mode only: true if some pairs must not draw each other.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses substantial behavior beyond the annotations: the zero-knowledge browser draw, that no server sees matches, that names are never stored, that the returned link carries setup only without assignments, and that invalid keep-apart configurations return no link with the conflict named. This richly supplements the readOnlyHint/idempotentHint annotations with privacy, validation, and failure-mode context.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and contains no obviously wasted sentences, but it is a dense, run-on paragraph. The second sentence is especially long with nested parentheticals, which slightly hurts readability even though every clause conveys relevant information.

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 read-only, two-mode setup tool with seven parameters and no output schema, the description covers what the tool does, how each mode behaves, what is returned in success and failure, and the privacy model. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds useful cross-parameter semantics: it explains that names and group_size select different modes, clarifies that keep_apart entries are two-name lists referencing names from the names list, and reinforces that names must be distinct. These details go beyond the per-parameter schema text.

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 states a specific verb and resource: it configures a Secret Santa group and returns a pre-filled setup link to pickmysecretsanta.com. It clearly distinguishes the two operating modes (names → link, headcount → checklist). It does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling tools explain_secret_santa_rules and pick_secret_santa_gift, so it falls short of a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description makes the two usage modes clear: provide names to get a pre-filled link, or provide only group_size to get the site's setup checklist. However, it offers no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling tools, nor does it state any exclusions or prerequisites beyond the validation rules.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.