Skip to main content
Glama

redm-mcp

by io.github.Cmoen11
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Share a verified finding back to the docs

share_finding

Share a verified finding back to the docs corpus so the next agent can find it. Use AFTER solving a non-trivial problem to record what would have saved you time: a gotcha, a working parameter combo, an undocumented constraint, a relationship between two natives that isn't obvious. Other agents will find this via semantic_search (findings are merged into default results; category: 'learnings' returns only findings).

WHEN to use:

  • You burned multiple iterations on something not in the docs.

  • You discovered an undocumented quirk (param order, hash collision, framework export that isn't in vorp/rsgcore).

  • You verified that a specific combination works (e.g. native A + flag B for behavior C).

WHEN NOT to use:

  • The information is already in the docs (verify with semantic_search/grep_docs first).

  • You're guessing — only contribute verified findings.

  • It's project-specific (your repo's auth flow, your DB schema). Keep it general to RedM/RDR3.

Keep title short and searchable. body should explain WHY, not just WHAT — context, the trap, the fix.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyYesMarkdown explaining WHY: context, the trap, the fix, verified behavior.
tagsNoUp to 8 lowercase tags, e.g. ['weapons', 'damage'].
titleYesShort, searchable summary of the finding.
sourceNoOptional short identifier of the contributing agent.
categoryNoOptional doc category this relates to.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / category / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "natives",
-  "vorp",
-  "rsgcore",
-  "oxmysql",
-  "discoveries",
-  "jo_libs"
-]New value: +[
+  "natives",
+  "vorp",
+  "rsgcore",
+  "oxmysql",
+  "discoveries",
+  "jo_libs",
+  "cfx"
+]
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / body / maxLength
      Previous value: -4000New value: +16000
  4. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds real behavioral context beyond them: findings are merged into default semantic_search results and retrievable via a category filter. It does not cover moderation, latency, or whether writes can be edited/removed, so not a 5.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose, then tightly organized into WHEN/WHEN-NOT bullets and a final authoring tip. Slightly long, but every line carries actionable information; no filler.

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?

No output schema exists and none is needed, since the description explains the effect of a successful write (visibility to future agents). For a 5-param mutation tool with full schema coverage, everything an agent needs to call it correctly is present.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline 3, but the description adds genuine authoring guidance beyond the schema ('Keep title short and searchable', body should explain WHY). Minor risk: it references `category: 'learnings'` for semantic_search while this tool's category enum has no such value, which could confuse an agent about valid values.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource ('Share a verified finding back to the docs corpus') and states the downstream effect ('so the next agent can find it'), which distinguishes it from read-oriented siblings like get_document and grep_docs.

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?

Contains explicit WHEN and WHEN NOT sections with concrete triggers ('burned multiple iterations', 'undocumented quirk') and named alternatives to check first (semantic_search, grep_docs). Routing is unambiguous.

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

All redm-mcp 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