Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

独行录 / opcmenu

by io.github.yzlee
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

发消息圈

publish_moment

【需要登录】以本人名义公开发消息圈，进入关注者/同组织/匹配者信息流及撮合；只能删不能改，正文仅本人说过的话，发前念给用户确认。文字+最多9图+可选活动/产品/需求/组织卡片。本人发来的图放 images；外图先 upload_image_from_url(kind=moment-image)，其它实体图请挂卡，id 从 list_my_activities/get_my_products/list_my_needs/list_my_organization_memberships 获取。visibility 默认公开；仅组织内可见须 visibility=organization+organizationId。

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
imagesNo图片地址，最多 9 张，按顺序展示
contentNo正文（纯文本，最多 2000 字）
attachIdNo挂卡对象 id（活动也可传 slug）；与 attachType 成对
attachTypeNo挂卡类型：activity 活动 | product 产品 | need 需求 | organization 组织；与 attachId 成对
visibilityNopublic 公开（缺省，所有登录用户）| friends 仅互相关注的好友 | private 仅自己 | organization 仅某组织成员（须同时给 organizationId）
aiDeclarationNo用户声明AI才true；省略不证人工；agent非依据。
organizationIdNo只在 visibility=organization 时给：发在哪个组织（用户须是在册成员；id 从 list_my_organization_memberships 拿）

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / aiDeclaration
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "用户声明AI才true；省略不证人工；agent非依据。",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / organizationId
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "只在 visibility=organization 时给：发在哪个组织（用户须是在册成员；id 从 list_my_organization_memberships 拿）",
+  "maxLength": 64,
+  "minLength": 1,
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / visibility / description
      Previous value: -"public 公开（缺省，所有登录用户）| friends 仅互相关注的好友 | private 仅自己"New value: +"public 公开（缺省，所有登录用户）| friends 仅互相关注的好友 | private 仅自己 | organization 仅某组织成员（须同时给 organizationId）"
    • changedInput schema / properties / visibility / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "public",
-  "friends",
-  "private"
-]New value: +[
+  "public",
+  "friends",
+  "private",
+  "organization"
+]
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare destructiveHint=false, so the description carries the real burden and does: auth requirement, immutability (delete-only, no edit), distribution/matching consequences of publishing, and a content policy (must be the user's own words, confirm with the user before sending). These are operational facts an agent could not infer from the schema or annotations.

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?

One dense paragraph with no filler sentences; every clause (login, immutability, image routing, card sources, visibility default) carries distinct information. It is front-loaded with the login requirement and purpose but is a wall of text rather than broken into scannable segments.

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?

Seven parameters, no output schema, and thin annotations — the description covers nearly everything an agent needs to construct a valid call. It does not say what is returned on success (e.g. the new moment id, useful since there is no output schema), which is the main remaining gap.

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 baseline would be 3, but the description adds genuine semantics: the default of visibility=public, the coupling of organization with organizationId, the source systems for attachId, and the provenance rule for images. Only aiDeclaration is left entirely to the schema, which is acceptable since the schema explains it.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('以本人名义公开发消息圈') plus the scope of distribution (followers / same org / matchers feed). It is trivially distinguishable from siblings like delete_my_moment, comment_moment, or list_moments_feed because it names the publish act and its audience explicitly.

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?

It names prerequisites (login required), exclusions ('只能删不能改'), and routes to specific alternatives: external images must first go through upload_image_from_url(kind=moment-image), and card ids come from list_my_activities/get_my_products/list_my_needs/list_my_organization_memberships. The organization-only case is spelled out with the exact parameter combination required (visibility=organization + organizationId).

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

All 独行录 / opcmenu 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