Skip to main content
Glama

KnownFix

by io.github.b-hash88

Create a private professional-service order

order_service

Create a private ticket and signed Base USDC/ETH checkout for one published professional service. Accepts public HTTPS websites or public GitHub repositories only. Never include credentials, tokens, secrets, private repository URLs, or confidential data. The returned svc_ ticket is shown once and is the only report-retrieval credential.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
notesNoOptional review focus. Never include credentials, tokens, secrets, private URLs, or confidential data.
serviceIdYes
targetUrlYesPublic HTTPS website or exact public GitHub repository URL. Do not include credentials, query parameters, or fragments.
publishTargetNoOptional explicit consent to show the target and status in the public work queue. Defaults to false.
authorizationConfirmedYesMust be true: confirms the target is public and the requester is authorized to commission a passive, non-destructive review.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
specNo
statusNo
ticketNo
serviceNo
purchaseNo

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations are all false, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It adds critical context beyond them: the order is private, the checkout is for Base USDC/ETH, and the returned svc_ ticket is shown once and is the only report-retrieval credential. This is not contradicted by annotations.

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?

Four sentences each earn their place: core action, target scope, safety rule, and one-time credential warning. Information is front-loaded and there is no fluff.

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?

For a 5-parameter order-creation tool with an output schema and all-false annotations, the description covers the action, eligibility constraints, safety requirements, and the most important return behavior. Nothing needed for a correct call is missing.

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?

With 80% schema coverage, the schema already documents notes, targetUrl, publishTarget, and authorizationConfirmed. The description reinforces the public-target/no-credentials rule but does not add new parameter-level meaning such as how serviceId values map.

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?

The description uses a specific verb-plus-resource: 'Create a private ticket and signed Base USDC/ETH checkout for one published professional service.' It also scopes valid targets to public HTTPS sites/public GitHub repos, which separates it from list/check siblings.

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?

It clearly places the tool as the action for commissioning a published service and requires public targets and authorization. It does not name sibling alternatives or state when not to use, so it stops short of a 5.

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

All KnownFix toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools target clearly distinct resources or actions, and cross-references like 'use get_fix instead' sharply reduce confusion. A minor source of ambiguity is the cluster of redemption/offer tools (get_fix, get_skill, get_offer) and the three status-check tools, but their descriptions disambiguate them well.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent lowercase snake_case verb_noun pattern: audit_, check_, get_, list_, order_, request_, search_, submit_. The naming style is uniform and predictable across different domains.

Tool Count4/5

At 17 tools, the surface is slightly above the ideal 3-15 range but remains justified given the server's broad scope: catalog browsing, paid redemption, audits, services, requests, submissions, and checkout support. It is dense but not bloated.

Completeness4/5

The lifecycle coverage is strong: discover, get, request, submit, check status, order, pay, and redeem are all represented. Minor gaps exist, such as no cancellation/refund path, no way to update a submitted fix, and merch ordering delegated entirely to an external storefront.

Resources