blablabla

Send a script to my blablabla inbox

send_to_blablabla

Idempotent

Use this when the user wants to rehearse, run lines, learn or memorize lines, or prepare an audition or self-tape with a script or sides they attached or pasted in this chat and agrees to send it to blablabla, or when they ask to send, save or import such a script into their own blablabla account. The script waits in their blablabla inbox until they open the app and import it, the same way as a file shared from Files; in the app, blablabla reads the other characters' lines aloud and waits for theirs. Pass attached files exactly as provided (one script file, or up to 20 photos of its pages in page order). Use text only for a script the user pasted into the chat themselves, exactly as written, without summarizing, fixing or reformatting it. Never put your own transcription or description of an attached file or photo into text; if an attachment did not arrive, ask the user to attach it again. blablabla reads the script itself in the app. This app cannot read, search or list the user's blablabla scripts, and nothing about the script comes back here; the reply only confirms delivery. Do not use it to give feedback on, summarize or rewrite a script, and never for files that are not the user's own script; never invent a file or text.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "send_to_blablabla"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`text`	No	Script text the user pasted into the chat themselves, EXACTLY as written: every line, speaker name, blank line and stage direction, without summarizing, correcting, translating, shortening or reformatting. Use only when the user pasted the text rather than attached a file. Never put your own transcription, reading or description of an attached file or photo here; attachments go in files. Up to 200,000 characters.
`files`	No	Only when the app provides attached files as download links (ChatGPT): the files the user attached in this chat, exactly as provided: one script file (PDF, Word .docx, Final Draft .fdx, Fountain or plain text), or up to 20 photos that are the pages of ONE script, in page order. Otherwise call get_blablabla_upload_link. Do not use for pasted text; use text instead.
`title`	No	Optional short name for the script, only if the user gave one. Never invent one.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`kind`	Yes
`status`	Yes
`item_id`	Yes
`open_url`	Yes
`expires_at`	Yes
`file_count`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Adds substantial context beyond the annotations (which already cover readOnly/idempotent/destructive): the asynchronous inbox model, that the app itself does the reading aloud, that nothing comes back to this chat, and that the reply only confirms delivery. It also discloses capability limits ('cannot read, search or list the user's blablabla scripts').

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 trigger condition is correctly front-loaded and the ordering (what it does, delivery model, then caveats) is logical. It is long and somewhat repetitive, restating the 'exactly as written / never transcribe an attachment / never invent' rule across several sentences, which is more than strictly needed.

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 a write tool with an output schema, the description covers the trigger conditions, the delivery/auth model (user's own account), the attachment-vs-pasted-text distinction, and the confirmation-only return. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 already 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description still adds procedural meaning by prescribing 'pass attached files exactly as provided (one script file, or up to 20 photos of its pages in page order)' and restricting 'text' to user-pasted content only, plus warning against transcribing attachments.

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+resource: sending/rehearsal script material into the user's blablabla inbox, and clarifies the delivery model ('waits in their blablabla inbox until they open the app and import it'). It implicitly separates itself from read/feedback/summarize purposes, but the explicit sibling routing (get_blablabla_upload_link) lives in the schema rather than the description text.

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?

Very strong when-to-use triggers (rehearse, run lines, memorize, audition, self-tape) and clear exclusions ('Do not use it to give feedback on, summarize or rewrite a script... never for files that are not the user's own script'). The concrete alternative for non-ChatGPT attachment flows is named only in the files schema, not the description, so it falls just short of a 5.

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

All blablabla 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?