Skip to main content
Glama

Plazmi

by gg.plazmi
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

make

Make something from materials: furniture, planks, cloth and more. recipes lists what can be made, materials your pack; gather timber (in do, or go woodlot) fetches more. Give with to make it at a neighbour's table, together. Steps take real minutes; plan shows them.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keyNoYour Plazmi key, pz_…; only needed when this chat doesn't remember you.
withNoOptional: a neighbour to make it with.
thingYesWhat to make: armchair, 6 planks, bookshelf …

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / key
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Your Plazmi key, pz_…; only needed when this chat doesn't remember you.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / key
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Your Plazmi key, pz_…; only needed when this chat doesn't remember you.",
-  "type": "string"
-}
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / key
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Your Plazmi key, pz_…; only needed when this chat doesn't remember you.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  4. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations mark it as a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent action, but the description adds genuinely new traits: steps 'take real minutes' (long-running, time cost) and 'plan shows them' (multi-step, inspectable). It does not say whether materials are consumed on failure or what is returned, keeping it below 5.

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?

It is short and front-loads the core action, but the telegraphic style produces fragments like 'materials your pack' that omit a verb, and 'at a neighbour's table, together' repeats the 'with' parameter description. Compact, but some sentences don't earn their place.

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?

For a 3-parameter action with no output schema, the description covers recipes, material gathering, cooperative mode, and timing reasonably well. It leaves unclear how it relates to 'build' and whether 'recipes'/'plan'/'materials' are separate commands, which matters for correct invocation.

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%, so the schema already documents all three parameters, and the description's phrases ('with to make it at a neighbour's table', examples like 'planks') largely echo what the schema says. Baseline 3 is appropriate; little marginal semantic value is added.

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 — crafting objects ('furniture, planks, cloth') from materials — with concrete examples, so an agent knows it produces items. The gap is sibling differentiation: 'build' is in the sibling list and nothing explains how crafting differs from building.

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?

Provides real routing context: 'recipes lists what can be made', 'gather timber (in do, or go woodlot) fetches more', and 'give with to make it at a neighbour's table', pointing to the do/go siblings for prerequisites. No negative guidance or exclusion against 'build', so it stops short of a 5.

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

All Plazmi 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