Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Fizzl Buy

by io.github.Fizzl13
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Send feedback (free)

feedback

Report a bug, a missing feature or anything else about this service, in a structured way. Free. A person reads every report; nothing is run or changed automatically.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "message": "<message>"
    },
    "name": "feedback"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeNobug, feature (something missing) or other
contactNoOptional: how to reach you about it
messageYesWhat happened or what you need
paymentNoOptional: the payment it is about, when a paid call went wrong: its transaction (with the network) or a receipt id
endpointNoOptional: the route or tool it is about, e.g. /v1/token

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesReport id, to refer to it later
noteNo
typeNo
serviceNo
receivedYestrue: a person will read it

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations show readOnlyHint=false with destructiveHint=false, and the description usefully explains why: a human reads every report and nothing is run or changed automatically, which reassures the agent no side effects follow. It adds the free/no-cost trait, but omits expected turnaround or whether the reporter receives a reply, so it falls short of 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.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short sentences, zero filler, with the core action front-loaded before the 'Free' and 'nothing is run automatically' reassurances. Every sentence carries distinct information.

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?

A user-submission tool with an output schema in place, so return values need no description; the description covers cost and side-effect behavior, which are the main uncertainties. Minor gaps remain around confirmation, turnaround, and whether including payment details speeds resolution.

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%, so all five parameters (including the nested payment object) are already documented in the schema, and the baseline is 3. The description only hints at the structured categories ('bug, a missing feature, anything else'), which roughly maps to the type enum but adds no detail beyond the schema.

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 (report) and resource (bug, missing feature, anything else about this service), so an agent knows exactly what it does. It does not explicitly name a sibling to contrast with, but the purpose is self-evidently distinct from the payment-verification siblings, so a 4 rather than a 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The trigger condition is implied clearly enough (agent wants to file a bug or feature request about the service), and 'Free' removes cost hesitation. However, there is no explicit when-not guidance or routing to alternatives, e.g. that a failing paid call should first go through x402_diagnose rather than straight to feedback.

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

All Fizzl Buy 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