Skip to main content
Glama

RooQuiz

by com.rooquiz.payload

update_form_settings

Change how a form of the current team is delivered, as opposed to what it says (use update_form for title / questions / report / theme). Editable: submissionAccess (who may answer and whether seeing the report needs a login — this is the lead-capture gate), reportGateRequireCode (whether that login gate collects an emailed verification code, trading completion rate against lead quality), timeLimit, sharing (the result-page share button and personalised share card, which is what drives organic spread), answerSheet, booking (the result-page booking block that feeds the 1:1 call queue), gaTrackingId, sharedWithAll (whether every team member can see this form), and slug (the custom path that gives the public link a memorable, SEO-friendly address). Only the keys you pass are changed. Read the current values with get_form_share_info.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugNoCustom path of the public answer link — the SEO-friendly address (e.g. quizster.app/<team>/burnout-test on the platform domain, or <custom-domain>/burnout-test when the team's custom domain is serving). Lowercase letters, digits and hyphens, 2-64 chars, must start and end with a letter or digit, unique within the team. Pass an empty string to clear back to the random address. Changing it breaks the previous custom path right away, but the token address (/a/<publicToken>) always keeps working and the page's canonical URL follows the custom path.
formIdYesThe form UUID
bookingNoThe result-page booking block. The bookable hours live in the team's booking settings, not here — this is only the switch and the copy. Bookings that come in are handled with list_bookings / review_booking.
sharingNoResult-page sharing: the share button, the personalised share card and the public summary. Turning this off stops respondents spreading their results.
timeLimitNoAnswer-time countdown. Only knowledge quizzes (knowledge_quiz / random_knowledge_quiz) can turn this on — a countdown makes sense when unanswered means wrong, but rushing a scorecard or a personality quiz just produces careless answers.
answerSheetNoThe answer-sheet sidebar on the answering page
gaTrackingIdNoGoogle Analytics measurement id (G-XXXXXX) or Universal Analytics id (UA-XXXX-Y). Pass an empty string to clear.
sharedWithAllNoWhether every member of the team can see and open this form
submissionAccessNopublic = anyone answers and sees the report; login_to_view_report = anyone answers but must sign in to see the report (the default, this is how leads get captured); examinee_only = a login is required before answering at all
reportGateRequireCodeNoOnly applies when submissionAccess is login_to_view_report. false (the default for newly created quizzes) = the respondent only types an email and a name to see this one result — far more people finish, but the address is unverified and they get no account, and since result links do get forwarded, the report is effectively as reachable as public for whoever opens the link first. true = the respondent must confirm an emailed 6-digit code, so every captured lead has a verified address and the respondent gets an account they can return to. Quizzes created before this setting existed read as true.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugNoCustom path after this change; null when cleared (back to the random address)
formIdNoThe form that was changed
changedNoWhich settings this call changed
deliveryNoDelivery state: { isActive, submissionAccess, reportGateRequireCode, timeLimit, sharing, answerSheet, booking, gaTrackingId, sharedWithAll }; get_form_share_info adds the team-level examineeSignupDisabled (respondent self-signup off = a login-gated quiz turns away anyone not on the roster)

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only indicate this is a write operation, leaving the description to carry behavioral context. The description discloses partial-update semantics ('Only the keys you pass are changed') and explains real-world consequences of settings, such as lead capture, completion rate versus lead quality, and organic sharing. It does not mention side effects like slug breakage in the description itself, though the schema covers that in detail.

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?

The description is long but front-loaded with purpose and alternatives before the field list. Each parenthetical earns its place by adding decision-relevant context rather than repeating schema details. The density is justified by the number of editable settings, and there is no filler.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (10 parameters, nested objects, one enum), the description provides high-level coverage, partial-update behavior, and sibling routing. The rich schema and output schema handle the remaining validation and return-value details. An agent has enough context to select and invoke the tool 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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents every parameter. The description adds valuable business-level meaning beyond the schema: which fields form the lead-capture gate, the completion-rate/lead-quality trade-off, and how sharing and booking affect growth and the call queue. This helps an agent reason about parameter combinations, lifting it above baseline.

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 a specific verb ('Change') and a specific resource ('how a form... is delivered'), and explicitly distinguishes itself from update_form, which handles content like title, questions, report, and theme. It also enumerates the exact editable settings, leaving no ambiguity about what the tool operates on.

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?

It explicitly names the sibling tool update_form for content changes and get_form_share_info for reading current values. This gives an agent clear routing guidance: use this tool for delivery/settings changes, not content or read operations. The contrast is direct and actionable.

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

All RooQuiz toolsInspect
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