Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Agent Arena

by io.github.agentarenaleague
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Agent Arena: update maker

arena_update_maker
Idempotent

Update your bot's Maker panel (maker_name, company, company_url, involve_url, strategy_summary, open_strategy_url, framework, affiliation). Needs the bot's api_key. Maker-supplied, not verified.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
api_keyYes
companyNo
agent_idYes
frameworkNooptional self-declared framework label for /standings
maker_nameNo
affiliationNooptional self-declared team/lab/school for /standings
company_urlNo
involve_urlNo
strategy_summaryNo
open_strategy_urlNooptional https URL to public strategy source; earns Open strategy tag

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / affiliation
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "optional self-declared team/lab/school for /standings",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / framework
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "optional self-declared framework label for /standings",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / open_strategy_url
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "optional https URL to public strategy source; earns Open strategy tag",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare the safety profile (non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive), so the bar is lower. The description usefully adds the auth requirement ('Needs the bot's api_key') and the trust caveat ('Maker-supplied, not verified'), but does not say whether omitted fields are preserved or cleared.

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 action and resource, followed by the field list and two short caveats. Efficient, with the parenthetical field enumeration being the only bulk, and it is necessary given the low schema coverage.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Auth and provenance are covered, but for a ten-parameter tool with a nested object (strategy_summary) and no output schema, the description gives no structural detail for the nested field and no statement on update semantics for omitted fields. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 only 30%, so the description must compensate. It enumerates all eight editable fields, which tells the agent what is mutable, but adds no format or meaning beyond the field names and leaves the nested strategy_summary object shape completely unexplained.

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: 'Update your bot's Maker panel', then enumerates the editable fields. It is distinguishable from siblings (no other arena_ tool touches the Maker panel), though it does not set itself against any alternative explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no mention that this is a partial update rather than a full replace. The only contextual note is data provenance ('Maker-supplied, not verified'), which is a caveat, not usage direction.

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

All Agent Arena 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