Share by DeltaBreen

remind_signer

Email one signer a reminder now, without a link (they open their invitation). Only a signer whose turn it is and who has not signed; at most once an hour per signer.

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": {
      "request_id": "<request_id>",
      "signer_id": "<signer_id>"
    },
    "name": "remind_signer"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`signer_id`	Yes	The signer's id (uuid), from get_signature_request.
`request_id`	Yes	The signature request's id (uuid).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 30, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare non-read-only, non-idempotent, non-destructive, open-world, but the description adds genuinely new behavior: the reminder is delivered as an email to an external party, it carries no link (the signer must open the original invitation), and there is a one-per-hour-per-signer rate limit. The rate limit and eligibility rules are exactly the kind of trait annotations cannot express.

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?

Two sentences, no filler. The action is front-loaded and the eligibility and rate-limit constraints follow immediately, each carrying distinct information.

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?

For a two-parameter mutation with full schema coverage and a complete annotation set, nothing material is missing: delivery mechanism, recipient scope, preconditions, and throttling are all covered, and no output schema means return values need no explanation.

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% and both parameters are documented in-schema, including provenance for signer_id. The description adds the constraint that exactly one signer is targeted but gives no additional syntax or format detail, so the schema carries the load and the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Email one signer a reminder now') plus the delivery mechanism ('without a link'). An agent immediately knows what happens. It does not name the closest sibling, remind_id_check, so the contrast with that tool is left implicit rather than stated.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly encodes the when-not conditions: only a signer whose turn it is, only one who has not signed, and at most once per hour. These are precisely the guards an agent needs to avoid a wasted or rejected call, and they are stated as constraints rather than left to inference.

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

All Share by DeltaBreen tools Inspect

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

Need Help?