Skip to main content
Glama

Vocab Voyage

by io.github.jaideepdhanoa

get_recent_mistakes

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this when the signed-in user asks about words they've gotten wrong, missed words, words to review, or wants to revisit recent mistakes. Returns up to 25 words from the last N days (default 7) with miss-rate and last-seen timestamp, plus a link to the in-app Recent Mistakes page. SUMMARISE — never dump every row; tell the user the count, name 2–3 sample words, and recommend the page URL. Requires sign-in.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
daysNoLookback window in days (1–90, default 7)
limitNoMax words to return (1–50, default 10)

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, but description adds valuable behavioral details: returns up to 25 words, last N days default 7, includes miss-rate and timestamp, links to app page, and requires sign-in. No contradiction with 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?

Three sentences with zero waste. Front-loaded with usage condition, then return value details, then presentation guidelines. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

No output schema exists, so description must explain return value. It covers: what is returned (up to 25 words), timeframe (last N days), fields (miss-rate, timestamp), and a link. Also includes how to present results to user. Lacks exact structure of a word object but sufficient for a read-only list.

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 has 100% coverage for both parameters (days and limit). Description adds default for days (7) and mentions 'up to 25 words' which loosely aligns with limit but is slightly inconsistent with schema's max 50. No significant added value beyond 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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves words the user got wrong, missed, or wants to review. It specifies the resource (words) and action (get recent mistakes), and distinguishes from sibling tools like get_course_word_list or get_flashcards.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use (user asks about mistakes, missed words, etc.) and provides a usage instruction to summarize results. Does not mention when not to use or list alternatives, but the context of siblings makes it clear.

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