Skip to main content
Glama

findTestimonials

Customer quotes for use in testimonials-block. author + quote required. Rating 1-5. featured: true makes it prominent. Has drafts: use _status:"published" to go live (draft stays hidden + is excluded from the aggregate rating); schedule a future date via the schedulePost tool (collection "testimonials"). testimonials collection. Drafts: yes (publish workflow; a find WITHOUT draft:true returns the published main-table state only). Public read: yes via /api/agents. MCP capabilities: find, create, update, delete. ⚠ delete is PERMANENT (hard-delete; the admin Trash does NOT catch MCP deletes). Fields: author (required), role (localized), company, avatar (upload: media|brand), quote (textarea, localized, required), rating (number, 1–5), featured (boolean), publishedAt (date).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoOptional: specific document ID to retrieve. If not provided, returns all documents
pageNoPage number for pagination (default: 1)
sortNoField to sort by (e.g., "createdAt", "-updatedAt" for descending)
depthNoHow many levels deep to populate relationships (default: 0)
draftNoOptional: Whether the document should be queried from the versions table/collection or not.
limitNoMaximum number of documents to return (default: 10, max: 100)
whereNoOptional JSON string for where clause filtering (e.g., '{"title": {"contains": "test"}}')
localeNoOptional: locale code to retrieve data in (e.g., "en", "es"). Use "all" to retrieve all locales for localized fields
selectNoOptional: define exactly which fields you'd like to return in the response (JSON), e.g., '{"title": true}'
fallbackLocaleNoOptional: fallback locale code to use when requested locale is not available

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full transparency burden and does this well: it discloses permanent hard-delete, draft visibility and aggregate-rating exclusion, public read access, and the published-only behavior of find without draft:true. This is exactly the kind of behavioral context an agent needs.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is dense and front-loads the purpose, but it is written as a long run-on with redundant mentions of the testimonials collection and draft behavior. The content is relevant, but it would be easier to parse with bullets or shorter sentences.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides substantial context: required fields, draft lifecycle, scheduling via schedulePost, public read path, and a critical delete warning. It does not describe the response envelope or return format, but the schema already covers pagination and locale details.

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 adds domain-level meaning (author+quote required, rating 1-5, featured boolean, publishedAt) that could inform where/select clauses, but it does not add value to the generic parameters like sort, depth, or locale beyond what the schema already states.

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 opening phrase 'Customer quotes for use in testimonials-block' clearly identifies the resource and domain, and the field list distinguishes this from sibling find* tools. It lacks an explicit verb like 'List' or 'Retrieve', but the intent is unmistakable.

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 implies usage through the testimonials collection and published/draft workflow, and mentions schedulePost as a related alternative for scheduling. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over siblings like findPosts or findPages, nor does it provide when-not-to-use guidance.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources