Skip to main content
Glama

Vocab Voyage

by io.github.jaideepdhanoa

get_flashcards

Read-only

Use this when the user asks for flashcards, wants to drill words individually, or wants a tap-to-flip review session. Returns 1–12 cards for a test family. Renders the interactive Vocab Voyage flashcards widget on supporting hosts; per-card 'I knew it / I didn't' buttons persist mastery for signed-in users. Do not use for multiple-choice testing (call generate_quiz) or for a single word lookup (call get_definition).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countNoNumber of cards (1–12), default 5
test_familyNoisee, ssat, sat, psat, gre, gmat, lsat, general

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. Description adds context: returns 1-12 cards, renders interactive widget, persistence for signed-in users. No contradictions. Could add more on idempotency but not required.

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?

Three sentences with no waste: first sentence states purpose, second adds behavioral details, third provides exclusions. Front-loaded and structured for quick parsing.

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?

With 2 well-documented parameters, no output schema, and clear annotations, the description covers when to use, what it returns, interactive behavior, and exclusions. No gaps for this tool's complexity.

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 coverage is 100%, so schema documents both parameters. Description adds minor context (default count 5, test_family values) but does not significantly improve understanding 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?

The description states 'returns 1–12 cards for a test family', uses specific verbs (drill, tap-to-flip review), and distinguishes from siblings by explicitly excluding multiple-choice testing (generate_quiz) and single word lookup (get_definition).

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?

Explicitly states when to use ('user asks for flashcards, wants to drill words individually, or wants a tap-to-flip review session') and when not to use ('Do not use for multiple-choice testing... or for a single word lookup...'), naming alternatives.

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

All Vocab Voyage 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

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clear, distinct purposes with detailed descriptions. A few pairs like study_plan_preview vs get_study_plan_recommendation or get_definition vs explain_word_in_context have subtle overlaps, but descriptions effectively differentiate them.

Naming Consistency4/5

All tool names use lowercase snake_case with a consistent verb_noun pattern. Some names are longer but follow the same structure. No mixing of conventions, though the variety of verbs is high.

Tool Count3/5

31 tools is on the high side for a vocabulary server. The scope is broad (definition, quizzes, games, progress, parent/tutor features), but many tools are specific, making the set feel heavy. It earns its count but could be trimmed.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers most user needs: learning, testing, progress tracking, parental involvement, and support. Minor gaps like class management or deletion operations exist, but core vocabulary workflows are complete.

Resources