List the most recent WagerX real-money casino audits, newest first, each with real deposit/withdrawal amounts, payout timing and support response. Use for "What are the latest casino audits?", "Which casinos were tested this week?", "freshest crypto casino safety data". Example call: {"limit": 5}.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | 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?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the tool is a read operation that returns a list sorted by recency and describes the fields in each audit entry. It does not discuss rate limits, required authentication, or data freshness, but for a simple list tool this is sufficient context.
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 plus example queries and an example call, all front-loaded. Every part adds value: purpose, content, and usage hints. There is no redundant or verbose language.
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?
The tool is simple (one optional parameter, no output schema). The description covers what the tool lists, the sort order, the fields in each result, and provides natural language queries. It is complete enough for an agent to understand the tool's functionality and typical use cases.
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% (the parameter 'limit' has no schema description), so the description must compensate. However, the description only shows an example call with limit:5 and does not explain the parameter's meaning, default value, range, or effect. The agent must infer or look at the schema for constraints, which is inadequate.
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 verb 'List' and the resource 'most recent WagerX real-money casino audits' with explicit sort order 'newest first'. It also describes the content of each audit (deposit/withdrawal amounts, payout timing, support response), making the tool's purpose distinct from sibling tools like best_bonuses or list_casinos.
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 provides concrete example queries ('What are the latest casino audits?', 'Which casinos were tested this week?') and an example call, guiding the agent when to use the tool. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives, but the purpose is narrow enough that confusion with siblings is unlikely.
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.
Most tools have clearly distinct purposes (e.g., best_bonuses vs top_casinos vs new_casinos), but check_casino and compare_casinos overlap somewhat since compare_casinos includes check data; however, descriptions provide enough differentiation.
All tool names follow a consistent adjective_noun pattern (e.g., best_bonuses, check_casino, top_casinos) with clear, domain-appropriate verbs and nouns. No mixing of conventions.
Seven tools is ideal for this domain—covering listing, detailed checks, comparisons, bonuses, audits, and new entries—without being too few or too many.
The tool set covers the main user intents (find best casinos, check safety, compare, view audits, discover new ones), but lacks a search/filter tool and historical audit data retrieval, leaving minor gaps.