Skip to main content
Glama

Tollmint

by com.tollmint

psych_dark-patterns

Deceptive-design taxonomy with the regulation each pattern trips (EU DSA Art. 25, UCPD, FTC ROSCA and the Negative Option Rule), the signals that detect it in markup or copy, a severity score, and the honest alternative that achieves the same business goal. Use before shipping conversion changes, or to audit a competitor. Free — this call costs nothing. No account or payment required.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
searchNo
categoryNo
jurisdictionNoFilter to patterns regulated in a jurisdiction, e.g. "EU" or "US"
min_severityNo

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the call is free, requires no account/payment, and describes the return content (regulations, signals, severity, alternative). It does not mention rate limits or side effects, but as a read-only taxonomy lookup, those are unlikely to be critical.

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?

Three sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence defines the tool, the second gives usage context, the third covers cost/auth. Front-loaded with essential information.

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 no output schema, the description adequately explains the return value (regulations, signals, severity, alternative). It covers two of four parameters implicitly (jurisdiction, severity), but misses 'search' and 'category'. For a taxonomy lookup, this is reasonably complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is only 25% (only 'jurisdiction' has a description). The description does not elaborate on 'search', 'category', or 'min_severity' beyond what the schema provides. It implies jurisdiction and severity via 'regulations' and 'severity score', but leaves gaps for the other parameters.

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 clearly defines the tool as a 'deceptive-design taxonomy' listing regulations, signals, severity, and honest alternatives. It specifies use cases ('before shipping conversion changes' or 'to audit a competitor'), distinct from sibling tools like psych_dark-pattern-detect which likely focus on runtime detection.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance ('Use before shipping conversion changes, or to audit a competitor') and reinforces no cost or auth requirements. Does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to specific alternatives, but the context is clear enough for most agents.

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

All Tollmint 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

A4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

All 20 tools have clearly distinct purposes, grouped by domain prefixes (content_ai, design_ai, legal, psych, ref, tollmint, web). Even similar-sounding tools like psych_dark-pattern-detect and psych_dark-patterns are differentiated as a live scanner versus a reference taxonomy. No two tools overlap in functionality.

Naming Consistency4/5

Naming mostly follows a prefix_descriptive pattern, but some tools use hyphens (content_ai-score, design_ai-slop-detect) while others use underscores (legal_accessibility, psych_biases). This minor inconsistency prevents a perfect score, but the pattern is still clear and readable.

Tool Count4/5

20 tools is slightly above the typical 'well-scoped' range, but each tool serves a specific, justifiable need across multiple domains (legal, psychology, content analysis, geocoding, internal). The count feels comprehensive rather than bloated.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers all major areas implied by the domain prefixes: comprehensive legal compliance references, extensive psychology/behavioral design tools, content and design analysis, geocoding, and internal server management. No obvious gaps for the intended use cases.

Resources