agent-tool-finder

send_feedback

Report a bug, missing feature, wrong data, or a slow call on clink's shop — for a call you already made, not a new capability request (use request_agent_tool for that). Read the same day; if it's a real bug it gets fixed and you're told. Free.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`kind`	Yes
`route`	No	Optional. The endpoint path you called, e.g. /x/search.
`notify`	No	Optional. An email address or https webhook URL to ping when it's fixed.
`wanted`	No	Optional. What you expected/wanted instead, up to 2000 chars.
`receipt_id`	No	Optional. The rcpt_… id from the receipt block of the paid call you're reporting — links this to the exact call.
`request_url`	No	Optional. The exact call that went wrong, including query params.
`tx_or_buyer`	No	Optional. Your wallet address or a transaction hash for the call, if you have it — helps link this to the actual failed call.
`what_happened`	Yes	What happened, 3-2000 chars.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 6, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / receipt_id

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional. The rcpt_… id from the receipt block of the paid call you're reporting — links this to the exact call.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

AddedSep 28, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does deliver real behavioral context: cost (free), turnaround (read the same day), and outcome (real bugs get fixed and the reporter is told). It stops short of covering rate limits, auth requirements, or what the immediate response looks like, but the disclosure of SLA and cost is genuinely useful.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence carries purpose, scope, the alternative tool, the SLA, the outcome, and the price with zero filler. Nothing could be cut without losing routing or expectation-setting 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?

For a no-output-schema feedback tool, the description tells the agent what happens after submission and how it relates to its sibling. With 88% schema coverage the parameter side is handled by the schema, so the remaining gap is minor.

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 88%, so the schema already documents route, notify, wanted, receipt_id, request_url, and tx_or_buyer in detail. The description adds the framing that this is 'for a call you already made', which explains why the linking params exist, but it does not add syntax or format meaning beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb (Report) plus the exact resource and concrete complaint types (bug, missing feature, wrong data, slow call), and names the sibling request_agent_tool as the thing it is not. An agent can distinguish it from every other tool in the list without opening a schema.

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?

Gives both sides of the routing decision: use this for a call you already made, and use request_agent_tool for a new capability request. The condition that selects the alternative is stated explicitly rather than left to inference.

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

All agent-tool-finder tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Context Every Agent Can ShareAgents share what they learn, hand off work, and keep it when you switch models. Start with 5 GB free.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?