RooQuiz

finalize_image_upload

Step 2 of 2 for adding an image: call this AFTER you have PUT the file to the uploadUrl returned by prepare_image_upload. It verifies the uploaded object in storage, records it in the team media library and returns a media id + public URL. To use the image as a quiz cover or a landing-page cover, call update_form with flagImg or landingImage set to the returned media id.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`alt`	No	Optional alt text for the image.
`key`	Yes	The object key returned by prepare_image_upload.
`filename`	Yes	Original filename for admin display / download (same value passed to prepare_image_upload).
`mimeType`	Yes	Image MIME type used at prepare time. Must be one of image/png, image/jpeg, image/gif, image/webp.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`key`	No	Permanent object key
`url`	No	Public URL of the stored image
`mediaId`	No	Media id — pass it to update_form as flagImg / landingImage
`filename`	No	Original filename
`filesize`	No	Size in bytes, as measured on storage
`mimeType`	No	Detected image MIME type

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description clearly discloses the state-changing effects: verifying the object, recording it in the team media library, and returning a media ID and public URL. This adds behavior beyond annotations. It also implicitly warns that the upload must exist for verification, though it does not fully describe error cases.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two compact sentences capture the full workflow. The front-loaded 'Step 2 of 2' orients the user immediately, and every sentence in the description adds useful information with no redundancy.

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?

The description covers the prerequisite sequence, the side effects, the return value, and downstream usage. With an output schema available and a complete parameter schema, nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.

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. The description adds coordination semantics by noting that key, filename, mimeType are the values from prepare_image_upload, which is critical for correct invocation. Alt text is not described in the prose but is already explained in the schema.

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 states the specific verb 'finalize', positions it as 'Step 2 of 2' for adding an image, and clearly distinguishes it from prepare_image_upload. It says exactly what the tool does: verifies the upload, records it in the media library, and returns a media ID and public URL.

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?

Usage is explicit: call this AFTER the PUT request to the uploadUrl from prepare_image_upload. It also provides downstream guidance for using the returned media id with update_form for covers. This makes when-to-use vs. alternatives unmistakable.

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

All RooQuiz tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools map to a distinct resource and action, and the descriptions actively disambiguate similar operations (e.g., get_form vs get_form_share_info vs get_form_stats). The main potential confusion is between list_records and list_leads and between get_record and get_lead, since both describe leads from slightly different angles.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun convention, with resources like form, question, lead, booking, examinee, translation, and tenant parallel across actions. The few non-CRUD verbs like prepare_/finalize_, duplicate_, and reschedule_ still fit the same uniform pattern.

Tool Count2/5

48 tools is well beyond the 3–15 ideal and even past the 25+ threshold, making the tool surface heavy for an agent to navigate. The broad platform scope explains some of the size, but the count still risks overwhelming context and increasing misselection.

Completeness4/5

The server covers form lifecycle, question editing, translations, CRM leads, examinees, records, bookings, team/tenant operations, image uploads, templates, and analytics extremely well. Minor gaps remain—such as no lead/record deletion, no member removal or role updates, and limited booking-settings management—but most workflows can be completed with the existing tools.

Resources

Need Help?