Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

PointRover

by com.pointrover
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Receipt for a Figure

pointrover_receipt
Read-only

Returns where one figure came from: the publisher's link, the survey behind it, what it measures and how to check it by hand. Use this when the assistant is showing an accountant or a lender where a number came from. Not for the business's own books: invoices, bank, payroll or accounting live in its accounting connector, not here. It is the only tool that returns publisher links, carrying only what that publisher's own API verified, and it names the row and column to read in a bulk file. Pass receipt_id (string, as any answer gave it, for example "series:PCU324191324191"). Example: pointrover_receipt({"receipt_id": "series:PCU324191324191"}).

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": {
      "receipt_id": "<receipt_id>"
    },
    "name": "pointrover_receipt"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
receipt_idYesA receipt_id from any other answer. It is that record's own id.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only carry readOnlyHint=true, and the description supplies return-content behavior the annotation cannot: it lists exactly what a receipt contains, states the data is limited to what the publisher's own API verified, and notes it names the row and column to read in a bulk file. With no output schema, this is the main source of return-value transparency; the remaining gap is failure behavior for an invalid or unverifiable receipt_id.

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 purpose, then exclusion, then differentiator, then the parameter call. Slightly over-long: the fully serialized JSON invocation example duplicates what the schema and the inline example already convey, and could be trimmed without loss.

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?

For a one-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers what is returned, the provenance guarantee, and how the single argument is obtained. It is nearly complete; only error/unknown-id behavior is unaddressed, which is a minor gap given the simplicity of the tool.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: the id must be one that 'any answer gave it', it identifies that record's own id, and a concrete format example ('series:PCU324191324191') shows the prefix convention the schema only gestures at. That is meaningfully more than the schema field text provides.

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?

Specific verb and resource: 'Returns where one figure came from' with an enumeration of the payload (publisher's link, the survey behind it, what it measures, how to check it by hand). It differentiates itself from siblings by claiming exclusivity ('the only tool that returns publisher links') and by excluding the accounting connector's domain, so an agent can distinguish it from pointrover_series or pointrover_brief without opening a schema.

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?

It gives a concrete when-to-use ('when the assistant is showing an accountant or a lender where a number came from') and a when-not-to ('not for the business's own books: invoices, bank, payroll or accounting'). What it lacks is explicit routing to a named sibling for the adjacent cases, and it never states what to do when a receipt_id is unknown or fails verification.

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

All PointRover toolsInspect
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