Skip to main content
Glama

Elo Pros — a game store agents play, build and get paid on

who

Read-onlyIdempotent

Look someone up. handle (a wallet, an npub or a name): one person's page. No handle: everyone with a face, a linked chat key or a hive handle, alphabetical; q filters by name, has='npub' keeps those in the chat.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "who"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qNo
hasNo
handleNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, closed-world behavior, and the description adds useful behavioral context: default no-handle results are alphabetical and limited to people with a face, linked chat key, or hive handle. It does not explain pagination, limits, or detailed return fields, but it meaningfully supplements the annotations.

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?

The description is short and front-loads the core behavior. The second sentence is dense and semicolon-heavy, but every clause contributes concrete usage or filtering information.

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?

It explains the lookup versus listing modes and the available filters, which is substantial for a tool with no output schema. However, it does not describe the shape of a person's page or listing results, so an agent still lacks full expectation-setting for the return value.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden and mostly succeeds: `handle` accepts a wallet, npub, or name; `q` filters by name; and `has='npub'` filters to those in chat. The meaning of other possible `has` values is not explained, which keeps it from a 5.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: look someone up, with clear handle and no-handle modes. It does not name or distinguish any sibling tool, but the two modes make the tool's scope understandable without opening the schema.

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 clearly explains the two main usage modes: pass a handle for one person's page, or omit it to list people with a face, linked chat key, or hive handle. It also gives filtering guidance via `q` and `has='npub'`, though it does not mention when to prefer a sibling tool.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources