Spin or Flip
Server Details
Still losing time to small decisions? Spin or Flip brings randomization into Claude so you can offload mental load to chance instantly.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 4.2/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.
Only one tool exists, so there is no risk of confusion between tools. The single tool's purpose is clearly defined.
With only one tool, naming consistency is not a concern. The name 'spinorflip' is descriptive but does not follow a verb_noun pattern, though it is not inconsistent.
A single tool for generating a spinning wheel is borderline thin but fits the narrow purpose. The server would benefit from additional tools for related actions (e.g., history, customization), but it remains functional.
The single tool fully covers the server's declared purpose: generating a shareable spinning wheel with user-provided title, options, and optional background. No obvious gaps exist for this domain.
Available Tools
1 toolspinorflipAInspect
Send a decision wheel to Spin or Flip and get a shareable spinning-wheel URL. Use this whenever a user wants to spin a wheel or make a random decision. Before calling this tool, generate the wheel yourself: pick a short title (2–6 words) and 6–12 options (1–4 words each) based on the topic. Optionally include a CSS linear-gradient background that matches the mood of the topic. Returns a URL the user can open to spin the wheel instantly.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| title | Yes | Short wheel title, 2–6 words (e.g. "Best Pizza Styles", "Weekend Activities") | |
| options | Yes | 6–12 options, 1–4 words each (e.g. ["Margherita", "Pepperoni", "BBQ Chicken"]) | |
| gradient | No | Optional CSS linear-gradient matching the topic mood (e.g. "linear-gradient(135deg, #f97316 0%, #ef4444 100%)") |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must shoulder the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While it explains that the tool returns a URL, it omits critical behavioral traits: error handling if constraints are violated, idempotency, authentication needs, rate limits, or whether the tool modifies any state. Without this, an agent cannot fully predict the tool's side effects.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is compact (four sentences) and front-loaded: the first sentence states the core action and result, the second clarifies usage context, the third gives preparation instructions, and the fourth covers optional input. No unnecessary words; every sentence earns its place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given no annotations, no output schema, and only 3 parameters, the description covers the main aspects: what the tool does, when to use it, what inputs are needed (with constraints), and the output (a URL). It lacks details on error messages, rate limits, or what 'Spin or Flip' is, but these are minor given the tool's simplicity.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
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 value by providing concrete examples ('Best Pizza Styles', 'Margherita'), specifying word count limits (2–6 for title, 1–4 for options), and explaining the gradient's purpose ('matching the topic mood'). This contextual enrichment justifies a score above baseline.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states that the tool sends a decision wheel to Spin or Flip and returns a shareable URL. It explicitly says 'use this whenever a user wants to spin a wheel or make a random decision,' which directly identifies the tool's purpose. This is a specific verb+resource combination, and there are no sibling tools to differentiate from.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides explicit guidance on when to use the tool ('whenever a user wants to spin a wheel or make a random decision') and detailed prerequisites: 'generate the wheel yourself: pick a short title (2–6 words) and 6–12 options (1–4 words each).' It also notes optional gradient inclusion. This covers preparation and context excellently.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!