Skip to main content
Glama

Get Clipform Results

clipform_get_results
Read-onlyIdempotent

View response counts, choice/action answer breakdowns, and recent open-text answers for a form. Contact, file, draw, camera, and payment answers are counts only - use the dashboard for per-response detail. Needs a signed-in Clipform account (an anonymous session is asked to sign in).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contextYesDescribe the user's underlying goal in one sentence - not the tool you're calling.
form_idYesThe form UUID (returned by clipform_create_form, not the short share_id from the URL)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nodesYesNodes in form order. Contact/file/draw/camera/payment nodes carry only total_responses/total_views - no per-response detail.
results_urlNoDashboard Responses tab for this form. Not present for an anonymous caller.
total_responsesYesTotal unique respondents to the form

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / properties / context
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Describe the user's underlying goal in one sentence - not the tool you're calling.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
      -  "form_id"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "form_id",
      +  "context"
      +]
    • addedOutput schema / properties / results_url
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Dashboard Responses tab for this form. Not present for an anonymous caller.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  2. Added

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and closed-world behavior, so the bar is lowered. The description still adds real value beyond those: it discloses the answer-type aggregation constraint and the authentication requirement (anonymous sessions are told to sign in), which the annotations do not convey.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with what the tool returns, then the aggregation caveat, then the auth prerequisite. No filler, though the sentence order slightly buries the auth requirement at the end.

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?

With an output schema present, return format need not be described, and annotations cover the safety profile. The description covers scope, limitations, and auth, leaving only the sibling differentiation from clipform_get_responses unaddressed.

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 description coverage is 100% and both parameters are documented in-schema (form_id as UUID vs. share_id, context as goal statement). The description adds no parameter guidance, so the baseline 3 applies since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ('View response counts, choice/action answer breakdowns, and recent open-text answers for a form'), naming the exact data returned. However, it does not distinguish itself from the sibling clipform_get_responses, which appears closely related, so an agent cannot tell the two apart from the description alone.

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?

Gives clear exclusions and context: answers of type contact/file/draw/camera/payment are counts only and per-response detail requires the dashboard, and a signed-in account is required. It stops short of routing the agent between this tool and the near-identical clipform_get_responses sibling.

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.