Skip to main content
Glama

Shared Forest

Start a tree sponsorship

start_sponsorship
Idempotent

Needs OAuth scope sponsor:write (a Shared Forest account). Creates an unpaid order for the signed-in user and holds the spots. It charges nothing. The total must fit the spending limit the user set when connecting. The order expires after 30 minutes unless the user confirms. Returns confirm_url: give it to your user. The user logs in, accepts the terms and pays on that page. Ask the user before you call it and confirm name and total.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
linkNoOptional https link. It goes live after manual review.
emailNoOptional email for the confirmation and the invoice. Default: the email of the signed-in account.
spotsNoOptional positions from find_spots, one per tree. Omit and the server picks free spots.
quantityYesNumber of trees, 1-100. Larger orders get a lower unit price.
link_textNoOptional public label for the link. Requires link; approved with it.
design_idsYesOne design_id for all trees, or one per tree.
display_nameYesName shown on the trees, 1-32 characters, labelled Sponsored.
idempotency_keyYesRetry key, for example a UUID. A retry with the same key returns the same order.
short_descriptionNoOptional short public description. Requires link; approved with it.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / link_text
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Optional public label for the link. Requires link; approved with it.",
      +  "maxLength": 50,
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / short_description
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Optional short public description. Requires link; approved with it.",
      +  "maxLength": 160,
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / email / description
      Previous value: -"The user's email for the confirmation and the invoice."New value: +"Optional email for the confirmation and the invoice. Default: the email of the signed-in account."
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
      -  "quantity",
      -  "design_ids",
      -  "display_name",
      -  "email",
      -  "idempotency_key"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "quantity",
      +  "design_ids",
      +  "display_name",
      +  "idempotency_key"
      +]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses critical behavior: the order is unpaid, expires after 30 minutes, returns confirm_url, and the user must accept terms and pay there. It also warns that the total must fit the user's spending limit and instructs asking before calling. No contradiction with readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, or destructiveHint=false.

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?

The description is longer than one sentence but every sentence earns its place: auth, core behavior, cost, limit, expiry, return flow, and user confirmation. It is front-loaded with the most important constraint (sponsor:write scope) and ends with the action instruction for the agent.

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 tool with nine parameters, no output schema, and a user-interaction side effect, the description is complete: it covers required auth, the unpaid nature, the spending limit, expiry, the confirm_url return value, and the expected user flow. An agent has enough to invoke it correctly and handle the result.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context beyond the schema by explaining the spending-limit constraint on total and by framing spots as being held by the order. It does not need to restate every field because the schema already documents them.

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 states a specific verb and resource: it 'Creates an unpaid order for the signed-in user and holds the spots', clearly defining the tool as starting a sponsorship without charging. It is distinguishable from siblings like get_price_quote or plant_tree because it emphasizes the unpaid order and user-facing confirmation flow.

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 gives explicit invocation guidance: requires the sponsor:write OAuth scope, must fit the user's spending limit, and 'Ask the user before you call it and confirm name and total.' It does not explicitly name alternative tools or when-not-to-use conditions, 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.

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.