Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

FoxPlug

by io.github.OsakaSaul
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

log_update

Tell FoxPlug what you just finished building, in one short plain paragraph. Call it after a change a user would notice (user_facing true) or after plumbing nobody outside needs to hear about (user_facing false, which is kept out of drafts and counts toward "not worth a post"). It never posts anything. Free. Do NOT include secrets, keys, or tokens.

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": {
      "summary": "<summary>"
    },
    "name": "log_update"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
detailsNoOptional. Notable decisions or trade-offs (1-2 sentences).
projectNoThe project this work belongs to — a FoxPlug project name, domain, or repo (e.g. 'foxplug', 'foxplug.com', or 'owner/lcncagents'). Matched case-insensitively against your own FoxPlug projects and any repo/deploy routes. If it can't be resolved, nothing is written (not dropped) and the reply lists your project names so you can retry with an exact one. Optional when you have exactly one FoxPlug project.
summaryYesOne short plain paragraph on what changed and why a person would care. No secrets.
user_facingNoTrue (default) when a user would notice the change. False for plumbing: refactors, dependency bumps, migrations.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations only supply readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false; the description usefully adds that nothing is published, that the tool is free, and that user_facing=false entries are excluded from drafts and tallied as 'not worth a post'. It does not say whether entries can be edited or removed afterward, or what the response looks like beyond the retry hint in the schema.

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 short sentences with the action front-loaded and the mode distinction immediately after; nothing is padded. The one-word 'Free.' sentence is slightly clipped but carries real information about cost.

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?

For a 4-parameter write tool with no output schema, the description covers the write-vs-publish distinction, both modes, cost, and a safety constraint. The remaining gap — post-call editability and return payload — is partly covered by the schema's description of the unresolved-project reply.

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 is 3, but the description adds meaning the schema lacks for user_facing: it explains the downstream effect of false (kept out of drafts, counted toward 'not worth a post'). The secret/key/token prohibition reinforces the summary field's 'no secrets' note but adds little beyond it.

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 concrete verb and resource: tell FoxPlug what you finished building, as a short paragraph log entry. The 'never posts anything' clause separates it from a publishing tool, but the description never clarifies how it differs from the sibling record_work, which an agent could plausibly confuse with it.

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 explicit trigger conditions: call it after a user-visible change, and also after plumbing, with the consequence of each mode spelled out. What is missing is any routing against alternatives — no sibling is named as the choice for a different situation.

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

All FoxPlug toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources