Skip to main content
Glama

excalibur-mcp

by io.github.lonniev

excalibur_save_voice

Save your writing Voice (replaces the previous one — it is a per-npub singleton). profile is free text. bans is a list of {text, on} objects: text is the construction to avoid, on whether it is an active constraint. Blank/duplicate entries are dropped server-side. Owner-scoped; priced by the operator's pricing model (use check_price). Returns {"success": true, "voice": {...}}.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bansNo
npubNoRequired. Your Nostr public key (npub1...).
profileNo
dpop_tokenNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses that the tool is destructive (replaces previous voice), owner-scoped, priced, and drops blank/duplicate ban entries server-side. This provides essential behavioral context.

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?

The description is concise with 3-4 sentences, front-loads the main purpose, and each sentence adds value. No redundant content.

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 description is fairly complete given 4 parameters and an output schema. It covers the singleton behavior, replacement effect, bans details, pricing hint, and return format. Could mention dpop_token briefly, but overall sufficient.

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?

The description adds meaning to 'profile' and 'bans' parameters beyond the sparse schema (25% coverage). It explains bans structure and server-side behavior. Only 'dpop_token' is left undescribed.

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 clearly states the tool saves a writing 'Voice' and highlights it replaces the previous one (per-npub singleton), distinguishing it from read tools like excalibur_get_voice and other save tools like excalibur_save_snippet.

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?

The description indicates when to use (to set or update the voice), mentions owner-scoped and priced nature, and advises using check_price for pricing. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use, but the context is clear enough.

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

All excalibur-mcp 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

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct operation and domain (account, posts, coupons, credentials, scheduling, oracle, etc.), with clear differentiation even for similar-sounding tools like check_balance vs check_authority_balance or list_coupons vs list_my_coupons. There is no ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (e.g., create_post, delete_coupon, list_posts), with no mixing of styles. The excalibur_ prefix is uniform.

Tool Count1/5

With 72 tools, the server far exceeds the typical well-scoped range (3–15). While the functionality is broad, the sheer number feels excessive for a single MCP server, leading to an extreme mismatch.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the full lifecycle for core domains: CRUD for posts, snippets, coupons, credentials; complete flows for OAuth, npub proof, scheduling, notarization, and payments. No obvious gaps are present.

Resources