Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Fabrica (Sepolia testnet)

by land.fabrica
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Answer the questions for a property I'm adding

answer_adding_questions

Save, on a property the connected person is adding to Fabrica (Sepolia Testnet), the owner named on the deed (owner: one person, an entity with the person who signs for it, or several people with how they hold title) and the answers to the county's questions (answers, keyed by the question exactly as add_land or get_adding_status lists it; a select takes one of its options verbatim). Returns the record as get_adding_status does, with the questions still open: the county's questions depend on the kind of owner, so after saving the owner they are read again from the answer. Needs the connection's add-property grant.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "tokenId": "<tokenId>"
    },
    "name": "answer_adding_questions"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
emailNoWhere Fabrica writes about this property; defaults to the account's email
ownerNoThe owner named on the deed. One person: firstName, lastName, email. An entity: entityName, entityType, entityJurisdiction, and the person who signs for it (firstName, lastName, email, role). Multiple: people and qualifier.
answersNoAnswers to the county's questions, keyed by the question exactly as get_adding_status or add_land lists it; a select answer is one of its options, verbatim. An empty string clears an answer.
tokenIdYesToken id of the property being added (from add_land or get_my_properties_being_added)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already flag a non-read-only, non-idempotent write; the description adds the auth prerequisite (add-property grant) and, importantly, the non-obvious ordering consequence that the county's questions depend on the owner kind and are re-read after saving. It also describes the response shape as matching get_adding_status with open questions, but says nothing about validation failures or partial-write behavior.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and the two things saved, and every clause carries information (grant, question keying, return shape). The first sentence is heavily nested with parenthetical enumeration of owner kinds, which costs some readability for an otherwise waste-free definition.

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?

Despite a deeply nested owner object and four parameters, the definition covers auth, the dependency between owner and questions, and what the return looks like in the absence of an output schema. An agent has enough to call it correctly in the add-property sequence.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so owner variants, answer keying, verbatim select options, and empty-string clearing are already documented in the schema. The description restates those same points (owner kinds, answers keyed exactly as listed) without adding new format or constraint detail, so baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Save') plus the two resources it writes: the deed owner and the county's question answers, on a property being added to Fabrica (Sepolia Testnet). The owner/answers split and the reference to add_land and get_adding_status make it immediately distinguishable from those siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Places the tool in the add-property flow (owner plus county answers, with question keys taken from add_land or get_adding_status) and states the access requirement: the connection's add-property grant. It does not explicitly say when not to use it or name a preferred alternative for a given situation, so it stops short of full when/when-not routing.

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

All Fabrica (Sepolia testnet) 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