Dynamoi

Read Distribution Status

dynamoi_get_distribution_status

Read-only

Read native foundation, application, agreement, catalog or release status for an accessible artist through the same owners as web/mobile. Release intake status requires editor access, as on web; catalog retains viewer scoping. Catalog is a status overview; releases returns the latest 20 submissions, not complete history. Rights and agreement attestation and sending releases to stores are done by the artist in web or the app.

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": {
      "artistId": "<artistId>",
      "section": "<section>"
    },
    "name": "dynamoi_get_distribution_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`section`	Yes
`artistId`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`code`	No
`data`	No
`kind`	No
`field`	No
`status`	Yes
`draftId`	No
`message`	No
`retryable`	No
`nextAction`	No
`failureStage`	No
`prerequisite`	No
`screeningResult`	No
`retryAfterSeconds`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 2, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already establish that this is a safe read operation, and the description adds substantive behavioral detail beyond them. It discloses section-specific access rules, viewer scoping, and the important limitation that releases returns only the latest 20 submissions rather than complete history. It also clarifies which related actions the tool intentionally does not perform.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose before moving into access and scoping details. It is dense but information-rich, with each sentence adding operational context. The final boundary sentence is somewhat tangential to status reading but still helps prevent misuse.

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?

The tool has an output schema, so the description need not explain return values. It covers access requirements, section semantics, scoping, and a key completeness limitation. The remaining gap is that it does not explicitly route the caller away from similar sibling tools.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description has to carry the semantic burden, and it does so for the section enum by explaining foundation, application, agreement, catalog, and release statuses. It also clarifies the distinction between catalog and releases. It does not explicitly explain artistId, though its format and name make its meaning clear.

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 clear verb-resource pair: reading distribution status for an accessible artist across five named sections. It also distinguishes catalog overview from releases history. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from close siblings like dynamoi_get_distribution_application or dynamoi_get_platform_status, so it stops short of 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 description supplies useful context about access requirements and section behavior, especially editor access for release intake and viewer scoping for catalog. It also states that certain actions, such as attestation and sending releases to stores, belong in web or app rather than here. However, it does not explicitly say when to choose this tool over close siblings such as dynamoi_get_distribution_application.

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

All Dynamoi tools Inspect

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.