Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

hunchful

by io.hunchful
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Relay: knock on someone new

knock

First contact with someone from find_people, only with the person's yes on the wording. Reveal who they are (reveal: identity) or give real context (reveal: context, 40+ characters). It's a draft they send; 5 a day; a decline is silent.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
refYesA result's ref from find_people.
revealYes
contextNoRequired for reveal='context' (40–600 chars); optional otherwise.
messageNoOptional first message, max 800 chars.
shareStyleNoShow the person's collaboration-style summary to the recipient (default true).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
-  "additionalProperties": false,
-  "properties": {
-    "confirmUrl": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "draftId": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "knockId": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "note": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "status": {
-      "enum": [
-        "sent",
-        "draft"
-      ],
-      "type": "string"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "status",
-    "note"
-  ],
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. Added

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses important behavior: a 5-per-day limit, that it is a draft the recipient sends, that a decline is silent, and that consent on wording is required. It still does not explain the exact response or failure modes, but it adds substantial operational context for a non-read-only tool.

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 compact and front-loaded, with each phrase carrying operational meaning: source, consent, reveal mode, draft behavior, rate limit, and silent decline. There is no unnecessary filler.

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?

For a first-contact mutation tool with consent and rate constraints, the description covers the key behavioral facts an agent needs before calling it. It is not fully exhaustive about outcomes or response shape, but the annotations and schema cover much of the remaining structure.

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 already 80%, but the description adds useful meaning for the reveal enum by explaining identity versus context and noting the 40+ character floor for context. It does not clarify message or shareStyle, but those are covered by schema descriptions.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific action: first contact with someone from find_people, including the two reveal modes. It distinguishes this from ordinary messaging by framing it as first contact, though it does not name a sibling alternative directly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives a clear prerequisite: only use with the person's yes on the wording, and only for people from find_people. However, it does not explicitly say when to use this instead of alternatives like message_member or propose_message, so the usage guidance is implied rather than complete.

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

All hunchful 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