Список опубликованных релизов стартапа с файлами. Для LAUNCHED-проектов downloadUrl — постоянная прямая ссылка. На закрытых стадиях ссылка возвращается только для своих стартапов или где у вас открыт доступ (иначе locked=true, downloadUrl=null).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| startup_slug | Yes | Startup slug |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| items | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Output schema / properties / items / items / properties / assets / items / properties / downloadUrl / typePrevious value: -"string"New value: +[
+ "string",
+ "null"
+]Output schema / properties / items / items / properties / lockedAdded value: +{
+ "type": "boolean"
+}Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "items": {
+ "items": {
+ "additionalProperties": true,
+ "properties": {
+ "assets": {
+ "items": {
+ "additionalProperties": true,
+ "properties": {
+ "downloadUrl": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "filename": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "platform": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "size": {
+ "type": "number"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ },
+ "id": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "publishedAt": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "version": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "items"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint), the description adds critical behavioral context: downloadUrl behavior depends on startup stage and user access, with locked=true when access is restricted. This explains conditional output, which is valuable for the agent.
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?
The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose and followed by a key behavioral detail. Every word contributes meaning; no redundancy or fluff.
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?
Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, read-only, has output schema), the description covers the main purpose and a significant behavioral nuance (locked vs direct links). With output schema present, return format is not required. The description is complete for agent decision-making.
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?
The only parameter, startup_slug, is fully described in the schema (100% coverage). The description does not add additional meaning or constraints beyond referencing startups in general. Schema coverage is high, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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?
The description clearly states the tool lists published releases of a startup with files, using specific verbs and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like create_release and announce_launch by focusing on read operations and providing details about download URL behavior based on startup stage.
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?
The description explains the behavior of downloadUrl under different startup stages, which helps users understand when results may be locked. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_waitlist or list_categories, so usage guidance is implied but not explicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.