Reflecto

This connector has been deprecated

This connector has been replaced by Reflecto.

Check reply

check_reply

Read-onlyIdempotent

Poll for the user's answer to a pending request_approval. Each call waits up to wait_seconds (default 20s, max 45s) server-side and returns the moment the user answers, so call it back-to-back in a loop — there's no need to add your own delay between calls. Returns pending while unanswered, answered with a choice_index once the user taps, or expired once the ask's deadline passes.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`request_id`	Yes
`wait_seconds`	No	Bounded server-side wait (default 20, max 45). The call returns early the moment the user answers.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`status`	Yes
`expires_at`	Yes
`answered_at`	No
`choice_index`	No	0-based index into the choices array YOU sent in request_approval. The server never stores the labels — map the index yourself.

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations by explaining server-side waiting, timeouts, early return behavior, no need for client-side delays, and the exact return states (pending, answered, expired).

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 dense, front-loaded sentences with no filler. Every sentence adds operational value: what it does, how to call it repeatedly, and what it returns.

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?

Given the annotations, schema, and output schema, the description fully covers the polling lifecycle and return states. No critical operational gap remains for an agent deciding whether and how to invoke it.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The description adds meaning to wait_seconds with default/max behavior and early-return semantics. request_id is not explicitly described as 'the ID returned by request_approval', but the phrasing 'pending request_approval' makes its role reasonably clear.

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 ('Poll') and a distinct resource ('the user's answer to a pending request_approval'), which clearly differentiates it from siblings like request_approval, send_notification, and cancel_reminder.

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?

Clearly establishes when to use it: after a request_approval is pending, poll in a loop until the user answers or the deadline passes. It doesn't explicitly name an alternative/exclusion, but the context is unambiguous.

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

All Reflecto tools Inspect

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

A4.5/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct action: scheduling vs cancelling reminders, pushing vs ringing a phone, sending vs receiving files/shared items, and requesting vs polling approvals. The only close pair, send_notification and remind_me, is clearly separated by immediacy vs future scheduling, and the descriptions reinforce the boundary.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern: cancel_reminder, check_reply, get_shared_items, list_devices, request_approval, send_file, send_notification. Minor possessive forms like find_my_phone and remind_me still fit the imperative verb-first style without creating confusion.

Tool Count5/5

Nine tools is well within the ideal range and each one earns its place in a personal-device integration server. The surface covers notifications, reminders, approvals, shared items, file delivery, device discovery, and phone location without redundant or filler tools.

Completeness4/5

Core workflows are covered: reminders can be scheduled and cancelled, approvals can be requested and polled, notifications can be sent, and shared items can be read incrementally. Minor gaps exist, such as no way to cancel a pending approval and no update mechanism for reminders, but these are workable and the server is explicitly stateless about some of them.

Resources

Need Help?