Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

NicheDB

by dev.nichedb
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

follow_feed

Idempotent

Follow a feed as the key owner (needs a key). Channels: webpush, email, webhook.

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": {
      "feed": "<feed>"
    },
    "name": "follow_feed"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
feedYesFeed slug, e.g. new-on-steam (see list_feeds)
channelsNoDelivery channels: webpush, email, webhook; default ["webpush", "email"]
webhook_urlNohttps URL for the webhook channel, e.g. https://example.com/hooks/nichedb
webhook_secretNoShared secret the receiver verifies signatures with, any string, e.g. s3cret-value

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / channels / description
      Previous value: -"Default webpush,email"New value: +"Delivery channels: webpush, email, webhook; default [\"webpush\", \"email\"]"
    • changedInput schema / properties / feed / description
      Previous value: -"Feed slug"New value: +"Feed slug, e.g. new-on-steam (see list_feeds)"
    • changedInput schema / properties / webhook_secret / description
      Previous value: -"Shared secret the receiver verifies with"New value: +"Shared secret the receiver verifies signatures with, any string, e.g. s3cret-value"
    • changedInput schema / properties / webhook_url / description
      Previous value: -"For the webhook channel"New value: +"https URL for the webhook channel, e.g. https://example.com/hooks/nichedb"
  2. First observed

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and readOnlyHint=false, so the mutation safety profile is covered. The description adds the auth requirement ('as the key owner (needs a key)'), but the 'Channels: webpush, email, webhook' sentence merely restates the schema and it says nothing about what happens on re-follow or the webhook_url dependency.

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?

Two short sentences with the key constraint front-loaded; nothing is buried. The second sentence is somewhat redundant with the schema's channels description, which keeps it from a 5.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With annotations present and full schema coverage, the definition is close to adequate, but it omits the conditional dependency (webhook_url is needed when the webhook channel is selected) and any note on re-follow behavior. Those are gaps an agent would hit in practice.

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 every parameter is already documented in the schema (including channel defaults and webhook_url examples), which sets the baseline at 3. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, and the channels enumeration is a duplicate of the schema text.

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 description pairs a specific verb ('Follow') with a specific resource ('feed') and adds the key-owner scoping, so the action is unambiguous. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings like create_feed or list_feeds, but the verb/resource pairing is distinctive enough to route an agent correctly.

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?

'needs a key' communicates a prerequisite, which is useful context for use. However, it gives no when-to-use/when-not guidance and never points to alternatives (e.g., create_webhook for hook management or create_feed for making a new feed), so the selection logic is only implied.

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

All NicheDB 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