Skip to main content
Glama

Vocab Voyage

by io.github.jaideepdhanoa

play_game

Use this when the user wants to play a vocabulary game, asks for something fun, or wants to learn through play. Launches one of 11 mini-games inside the host chat. Renders the matching ui://vocab-voyage/game/{slug} widget on supporting hosts; falls back to a deep link elsewhere. Per-question answers persist via record_word_result; round completion fires record_session_complete + award_game_xp so MCP play counts toward streaks, XP, and mastery for signed-in users. Supported slugs: word_match, spelling_bee, speed_round, synonym_showdown, word_scramble, fill_in_blank, context_clues, word_guess, picture_match, crossword, word_search. Do not use for a serious test-prep quiz — call generate_quiz instead.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugYesGame slug: word_match | spelling_bee | speed_round | synonym_showdown | word_scramble | fill_in_blank | context_clues | word_guess | picture_match | crossword | word_search
countNoWords in the round (4–12, default 8)
test_familyNoOptional: isee, ssat, sat, psat, gre, gmat, lsat, general

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Description comprehensively explains side effects beyond annotations: launches game, renders widget/deep link, persists answers via record_word_result, fires record_session_complete and award_game_xp, and contributes to streaks/XP/mastery. No contradictions 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.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with usage guidance, but includes an exhaustive slug list that is already in the schema. Still reasonably concise and well-structured.

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?

Given no output schema, description covers return behavior (widget vs deep link), side effects, and integration with other MCP tools. Complete for a game launching tool with three parameters.

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% and description largely repeats schema info. While it lists allowed slugs, it adds minimal new meaning beyond what schema already provides.

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?

Clearly states the tool plays a vocabulary game with 11 specific mini-games. Distinguishes from sibling generate_quiz by explicitly warning against using it for serious test-prep quizzes.

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 details when to use: 'when the user wants to play a vocabulary game, asks for something fun, or wants to learn through play.' Also specifies when not to use and directs to generate_quiz as the alternative.

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