TestMyVibes

File a bug, feature request, or UX nit for operator triage

submit_feedback

Queues feedback for staff review. NOT acted on automatically — items sit in status="new" and are worked through with the operator. Good filing hygiene: one issue per submission, name the surface affected (e.g. "submit_test default step budget too low for OAuth flows"), include reproduction steps in the body. If you're filing while running another job, pass context.relatedJobId so the operator can pull the screenshots / report. Anonymous filers can include reporterEmail for follow-up.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`body`	Yes	Full context, repro steps, what you expected vs. what happened. Markdown OK; the admin view renders it.
`title`	Yes	Short imperative summary — what should change. E.g. "submit_test should accept devicePreset by alias".
`category`	No		bug
`severity`	No	critical = blocking real work, major = wrong result / cost, minor = papercut, suggestion = enhancement.	minor
`mcpClient`	No	Your MCP client name so we can spot patterns by tool (Claude Code, Cursor, Codex, etc.).
`relatedJobId`	No	If this feedback is about a specific test result, pass the jobId so staff can pull the report / screenshots.
`reporterEmail`	No	Optional contact for follow-up. Authed accounts already have an email on file; this is for anonymous catalog browsers.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	No	Tool result payload (JSON object)

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate non-readonly, non-idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds valuable behavioral context: items sit in status='new' and are worked through with the operator, clarifying the asynchronous nature. No contradictions with annotations.

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 description is a single paragraph with front-loaded key purpose. It is information-dense without excessive verbosity. A more structured format (e.g., bullet points) could improve scannability, but it remains concise and effective.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (7 parameters, 2 required, output schema exists but not shown), the description covers workflow, best practices, and relevant context. It adequately explains queuing behavior and parameter usage, making it complete for a feedback submission 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 description coverage is 86%, and the description adds practical meaning beyond schema fields: e.g., 'name the surface affected' for title, 'include reproduction steps in the body' for body, and 'so the operator can pull screenshots' for relatedJobId. This enhances the parameter semantics.

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 title and description clearly state the tool files feedback (bug, feature request, UX nit) for operator triage. It uses a specific verb-resource pair ('submit_feedback') and distinguishes itself from siblings like 'list_feedback' and 'update_feedback' through its submission context.

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?

The description provides explicit usage guidance: items are not acted on automatically, one issue per submission, include surface name and repro steps, pass relatedJobId for context, and optional reporterEmail for follow-up. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but the context is clear.

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

All TestMyVibes 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

A3.9/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

The tools cover a wide range of functionalities, but each has a clearly distinct purpose. For example, submit_test, submit_test_batch, submit_combo, and submit_interaction_scene are all different types of submissions with unique parameters. However, the sheer number of tools (43) might cause some initial confusion, but descriptors resolve ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., list_projects, create_project, get_test_results). The only exception is 'whoami', which is a common idiom and does not break the pattern. Overall, naming is highly predictable.

Tool Count3/5

43 tools is on the high side for a single server. The domain is broad (testing, worker marketplace, credits, cards, feedback, video), so the count is justifiable. However, it borders on being overwhelming, and some tools could be consolidated (e.g., multiple submit_* variants).

Completeness3/5

The tool surface covers core workflows like project creation, test submission, result retrieval, worker management, and credit operations. However, there are gaps: no update or delete for projects, no delete for worker offerings, and no user-facing combo editing (though combos are predefined). These are minor but noticeable.

Resources

Need Help?