Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Veritula

by com.veritula
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Reply to an idea

reply

Replies to an idea, criticism or comment on Veritula by its number, as the person who connected the app and marked as written with AI. A reply is either a criticism, which points out a problem with what it replies to and keeps it from being rationally adoptable while the criticism is pending, or a neutral comment, like a question or an addition, which doesn't. The content is Markdown. Posting takes signing in, and new accounts can post a few ideas a day.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "id": "<id>",
      "content": "<content>",
      "criticism": "<criticism>"
    },
    "name": "reply"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe number of the idea to reply to
contentYesThe reply, in Markdown
criticismYesWhether the reply is a criticism (true) or a neutral comment (false)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only mark this as a non-destructive, non-idempotent write. The description adds real context beyond them: sign-in is required, new accounts are rate limited to a few posts a day, and the reply is attributed to the account owner and flagged as AI-written. It stops short of saying what a successful response looks like or how failures are reported.

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 core action is front-loaded in the opening clause and no sentence is padding, but the second sentence is a dense run-on that carries three separate ideas (criticism definition, Markdown format, auth/rate limits) and could be split for faster scanning.

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?

For a three-required-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers attribution, auth, rate limits, content format and the semantics of the criticism flag. The one gap is a mild scope mismatch: it says it replies to 'an idea, criticism or comment' by number, while the schema's id is described only as 'the number of the idea to reply to.'

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 coverage is 100%, so id, content and criticism are already documented, giving a baseline of 3. The criticism explanation ('points out a problem... keeps it from being rationally adoptable while the criticism is pending') genuinely deepens the boolean beyond the schema, but the Markdown and 'by its number' points merely restate the schema.

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 first clause gives a specific verb+resource: 'Replies to an idea, criticism or comment on Veritula by its number.' That is enough to separate it from post_idea, but the purpose statement is bundled with non-essential framing ('as the person who connected the app and marked as written with AI') rather than naming the sibling it contrasts with.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description defines what makes a reply a criticism versus a neutral comment, which implicitly guides the criticism flag, and it implies posting requires being signed in. It never states when to use reply versus post_idea, nor any exclusion such as not replying to your own idea or invalid ids.

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

All Veritula 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