Skip to main content
Glama

Zambo AI Tools

by dev.zambo

zambo_help

The universal shortcut for humans and agents. Accepts any goal prefixed with '/zambo help me' or plain natural language. Routes automatically to the right combination of Zambo MCP + Axis MCP tools (100+ tools across 2 MCPs) and returns a plain-English action plan with the exact tools used. Perfect first prompt for new users. Usage: '/zambo help me [anything]' — build, validate, analyze, score, research, go on-chain, audit code, fix code, get strategy. No jargon, no setup, no API key. Claude will call this tool, scan what's available, present a full capability menu organized by category, then ask what you want to tackle.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
goalYesWhat you want help with. Plain English, any length. Examples: '/zambo help me validate my startup idea', '/zambo help me check this wallet', '/zambo help me find leads for roofing in Austin', '/zambo help me audit my code'. Also accepts the raw goal without the /zambo prefix.
contextNoOptional extra context — wallet address, repo URL, city, trade, domain, etc.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description must cover behavior. It explains routing and return of action plan, but doesn't mention limitations (e.g., doesn't execute actions directly, only plans). Missing some behavioral traits.

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?

Description is informative but could be slightly more concise. Front-loads key purpose and usage examples. Good structure overall.

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?

Given no output schema, description explains return format (action plan) and scope (100+ tools, 2 MCPs). Covers essential context for a help tool.

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% with descriptions already in schema. The description adds examples and clarifies usage patterns, but doesn't significantly enhance parameter meaning beyond schema.

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?

The description clearly states it's a universal shortcut that routes any goal to the correct tools. It lists specific use cases (build, validate, analyze, etc.) and contrasts with sibling tools by being a first-prompt aggregator.

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?

It explicitly recommends as first prompt for new users and provides usage format. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use it or how it compares to alternative sibling tools for specific tasks.

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

All Zambo AI Tools toolsInspect
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

A3.5/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Many tools have distinct purposes, but there are several overlapping or redundant tools (e.g., leadsignal vs leadsignal_generate, multiple code audit tools, multiple trading proposal/journal tools, and several 'universal' entry points like zambo_help, zambo_ask, zambo_universal). Descriptions help, but the volume creates ambiguity.

Naming Consistency3/5

Naming conventions vary across prefixes (zambo_, zambot_, axis_, presence_, trading_, etc.), with some tools using single words (weather, translate) and others using verb_noun patterns. Aliases like leadsignal_generate for leadsignal break consistency. While prefixes provide some grouping, the overall pattern is mixed.

Tool Count2/5

125 tools is excessive for a single MCP server, even if the server aims to be a universal stack. This makes it overwhelming for agents to navigate and increases the likelihood of misselection. Many tools could be split into domain-specific servers.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface is extraordinarily comprehensive, covering agent identity, cross-layer orchestration, code analysis, content generation, legal scanning, lead generation, trading, on-chain data, and more. Nearly any common agent task is supported with multiple tools, leaving few obvious gaps.

Resources