Skip to main content
Glama

Mark

by com.use-mark.app
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

List Wrong Answers

list_wrong_answers
Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists wrong AI answers, newest seen first: ones members logged from any engine (including ones Mark doesn't check weekly), and competitor_instead ones the weekly check filed (source weekly_check). Each has a reason. Filter by status and buyer question. Does not change anything. Related: save_wrong_answer, get_buyer_question_answers.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoAt most this many rows, newest first (default 25).
statusNoopen (default), resolved, or all.open
questionNoActive buyer question id, or its exact text.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
appUrlYes
wrongAnswersYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed6 schema fields changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / wrongAnswers / items / properties / createdById / description
      Added value: +"Null for weekly_check."
    • changedOutput schema / properties / wrongAnswers / items / properties / createdById / type
      Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
    • changedOutput schema / properties / wrongAnswers / items / properties / quote / description
      Previous value: -"What the engine said, as the member pasted it."New value: +"What the engine said: as the member pasted it, or the whole answer for weekly_check."
    • addedOutput schema / properties / wrongAnswers / items / properties / reason
      Added value: +{
+  "enum": [
+    "wrong_fact",
+    "competitor_instead",
+    "negative_framing",
+    "outdated",
+    "missing_citation",
+    "other"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / wrongAnswers / items / properties / source
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "weekly_check: the weekly check filed it because the answer named an active competitor and not the brand.",
+  "enum": [
+    "member",
+    "weekly_check"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedOutput schema / properties / wrongAnswers / items / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "id",
-  "engine",
-  "prompt",
-  "quote",
-  "seenOn",
-  "note",
-  "question",
-  "market",
-  "createdById",
-  "createdAt",
-  "resolvedAt",
-  "resolvedById"
-]New value: +[
+  "id",
+  "engine",
+  "reason",
+  "source",
+  "prompt",
+  "quote",
+  "seenOn",
+  "note",
+  "question",
+  "market",
+  "createdById",
+  "createdAt",
+  "resolvedAt",
+  "resolvedById"
+]
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so 'Does not change anything' is largely redundant. The description earns credit for the source taxonomy (member-logged from any engine vs weekly_check competitor_instead) and 'each has a reason', which are behavioral details not in the structured fields.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded and the three short blocks are efficient. The clause 'including ones Mark doesn't check weekly' is dense insider jargon that costs a little readability, keeping it from a 5.

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?

With full annotations, 100% schema coverage, an output schema, and no nested objects, the description supplies everything needed: what is returned, ordering, source provenance, and filters. 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.

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description mentions filtering by status and buyer question and ordering by newest, which corroborates the schema but adds no syntax or format detail beyond it.

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?

States a specific verb (lists) and resource (wrong AI answers) with ordering (newest seen first) and scope (member-logged entries plus weekly_check competitor_instead entries). This lets an agent distinguish it from save_wrong_answer and get_buyer_question_answers without opening schemas.

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?

Gives clear context for use (filter by status and buyer question) and names related tools for routing. It does not, however, state an explicit when-not-to-use or a condition that selects this over get_buyer_question_answers, so it falls short of a full 5.

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

All Mark toolsInspect
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