report_bug
Report a bug, missing feature, or send feedback. Include the conversation array with recent messages for reproduction.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| context | No | ||
| message | Yes | ||
| conversation | No | [] |
Report a bug, missing feature, or send feedback. Include the conversation array with recent messages for reproduction.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| context | No | ||
| message | Yes | ||
| conversation | No | [] |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly=false, destructive=false, and idempotent=true. The description adds the reproduction context but does not disclose side effects, auth requirements, or rate limits, offering only minimal behavioral transparency beyond annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single concise sentence that front-loads the action and includes a specific, actionable instruction. No filler or redundant content.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple three-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the purpose and the key usage detail (conversation array). The unexplained context parameter is optional with a default, so overall completeness is good but not perfect.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It references the conversation array and implies message holds the report content, but the context parameter remains unexplained. This partial coverage leaves a notable gap.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Clearly states the verb 'Report' and the objects 'bug, missing feature, or send feedback'. It is distinct from siblings like authenticate, marketplace, and show_version, which handle other concerns.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Provides direct usage guidance by instructing to include the conversation array for reproduction. Sibling tools are clearly unrelated, so no exclusions are needed; the context is unambiguous.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
The core query tool and platform utilities are distinct, but connect and toolkit_info both report connection status and could confuse an agent. The marketplace tool is multi-functional but clearly scoped. Overall, purposes are mostly separable.
Names mix English and Portuguese (authenticate vs. beneficiario_final_consultar) and use inconsistent patterns: verb (connect, authenticate), noun (marketplace), noun_noun (toolkit_info), and verb_noun (report_bug, show_version). The Portuguese tool reverses the typical verb_noun order.
Seven tools is within a reasonable range, but most are generic platform utilities unrelated to the server's stated purpose of beneficiary final queries. The core domain is served by a single tool, while the rest feel bolted on.
For the beneficiary final domain, the single query tool covers the basic use case, but there are no supporting operations like batch queries, history, or credit management. The platform tools are general but don't address domain-specific needs, leaving the surface incomplete for a dedicated compliance service.