Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

ToolGrail

by io.github.logicgeek
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Recommend tools for work

recommend_tools
Read-onlyIdempotent

List tools for task slugs, ordered by published fit weights, optionally for a sector. A role supplies its suggested tasks when taskSlugs is omitted. Get slugs from list_taxonomy or search_tools. Each listing includes the tool's own MCP server, if any; set mcp to keep only tools that connect to AI assistants.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "recommend_tools"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
mcpNoOnly tools whose own MCP server matches: yes, no, or a connection type (oauth = sign in with account, none = no sign-in, api-key, local).
roleNoRole slug.
limitNoMost tools to return.
sectorNoSector slug. Limits results to tools that serve this sector and favours specialists.
taskSlugsNoTask slugs. Required unless role is given.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, closed-world behavior, yet the description adds real substance: results are ranked by published fit weights, sector filtering both limits and favours specialists, and each listing surfaces the tool's own MCP server. The mcp filter's intent ("keep only tools that connect to AI assistants") clarifies a non-obvious behavioral effect.

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?

Four sentences, each carrying distinct information, with the core purpose front-loaded and prerequisites/filters following. Density is high but nothing is padding; minor cost is that the role/taskSlugs fallback is buried mid-paragraph.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-shape burden and does so adequately: listings include the tool's own MCP server and are ranked by fit weight. Limit/pagination semantics and the exact listing fields are left to the schema, which is acceptable for a 5-param read tool.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description earns above that by explaining the interaction between role and taskSlugs (role supplies suggested tasks when slugs are omitted) and by framing sector as both a restriction and a specialist-favouring ranking signal, which the schema only partially conveys.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("List tools for task slugs") plus the ordering rule ("ordered by published fit weights") and optional sector scoping. It implicitly separates itself from search_tools by telling the agent to use search_tools/list_taxonomy only to obtain slugs, but it never explicitly contrasts the recommendation semantics with search.

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?

Gives a clear workflow: fetch slugs from list_taxonomy or search_tools first, then call this. It also explains the role-as-alternative path when taskSlugs is omitted. It stops short of stating when NOT to use this versus search_tools or compare_tools.

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

All ToolGrail toolsInspect
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.

Resources