Skip to main content
Glama

Newsdata

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Send Pipeworx Feedback

pipeworx_feedback

Tell the Pipeworx team something is broken, missing, or needs to exist. Use when a tool returns wrong/stale data (bug), when a tool you wish existed isn't in the catalog (feature/data_gap), or when something worked surprisingly well (praise). ONLY for tools served by this Pipeworx connection — if the tool came from a different MCP server in your client (another vendor's Gmail, Splunk, Slack, etc. connector), we cannot fix it and reporting it here only delays you; file it with that server instead. Not sure? Pipeworx tool names are the ones this connection lists. Describe the issue in terms of Pipeworx tools/packs — don't paste the end-user's prompt. Filing without an account returns a claim_token; pass it back later as pipeworx_feedback({claim_token:"pwfb_…"}) to read whether it was fixed and what changed. The team reads digests daily and signal directly affects roadmap. Rate-limited to 5 per identifier per day. Free; doesn't count against your tool-call quota.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeNobug = something broke or returned wrong data. feature = a new tool or capability you wish existed. data_gap = data Pipeworx does not currently expose. praise = positive note. other = anything else.
contextNoOptional structured context: which tool, pack, or vertical this relates to.
messageNoYour feedback in plain text. Be specific (which tool, what error, what data was missing). 1-2 sentences typical, 2000 chars max.
claim_tokenNoRead the reply to a report you filed earlier: pass the `pwfb_…` token that filing returned, with no other arguments. Returns the status and, once resolved, what actually changed.

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint false, so the write nature is known. The description adds beyond annotations by disclosing the claim_token workflow (no account needed, returns token, can be passed back later), rate limits (5/day), and that feedback is free and doesn't count against quota. This enriches the agent's understanding of side effects and constraints.

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?

The description is a single dense paragraph but every sentence contributes distinct information. While it could be broken into subsections for readability, the front-loaded purpose and seamless integration of usage and constraints make it effective without excess verbiage.

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?

For a feedback tool with no output schema and a parameter object, the description covers the entire interaction lifecycle: what to report, how to report it, what happens when no account exists, how to retrieve status later, and how to avoid misdirected reports. Rate limits and the 'don't paste user prompt' guideline round out a complete, self-contained explanation.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by instructing the agent to describe issues in terms of Pipeworx tools/packs and to avoid pasting end-user prompts, which refines how to populate the 'message' and 'context' fields. It also explicitly explains the claim_token parameter's purpose without relying solely on the schema.

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 starts with a specific verb ('Tell') and resource ('Pipeworx team'), and clearly defines the tool's scope: reporting broken/missing/needed functionality. It distinguishes this from all sibling tools (research/news entity tools) by focusing on feedback rather than data retrieval or analysis.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use categories (bug, feature/data_gap, praise) and, crucially, a when-not-to-use condition: if the tool came from a different MCP server, direct the user to file elsewhere. Also includes token-based follow-up usage and rate-limit context, making the conditions for use unambiguous.

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

All Newsdata 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

A4/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Most tools have clearly distinct roles, and the extensive descriptions help differentiate intent, but the ask_pipeworx family—especially ask_pipeworx_beta, which is currently identical to ask_pipeworx—creates real ambiguity. Overlapping entry points like ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research, and validate_claim could also cause misselection without careful reading.

Naming Consistency4/5

All 34 tools use consistent snake_case, and clear verb-led or noun-prefixed patterns emerge across families like ask_pipeworx*, polymarket_*, and remember/recall/forget. Minor deviations such as ai_visibility_check and recent_changes being noun phrases rather than verb_noun constructions prevent a perfect score.

Tool Count2/5

34 tools is well above the 25-tool threshold for over-scoping, making the set heavy for an agent to navigate. While the server spans many domains, several tools like generate_llms_txt, scan_dependency, and ai_visibility_check feel tangential to the core news/research purpose and would be better split into separate servers.

Completeness4/5

The core news/research domain is well covered: lookup, grounded verification, deep multi-source research, entity profiles, comparisons, subscriptions, and alert feeds are all present with no obvious dead ends. Minor gaps exist—such as no direct full-text article retrieval or a dedicated free-text news search beyond latest_news filters—but agents can work around them.

Resources