Remember Me Collections

browse_collections

Read-onlyIdempotent

Browse published Bible verse collections. Search by keyword, filter by language, sort by popularity.

Each result includes the collection's raw cover image — the URL the publisher set, or null if they set none (the app may still show an auto-generated cover when null). This is the stored value, not the computed display image.

Args: search: Search term to filter by name, description, or publisher name. language: Language code prefix (e.g. "en", "de", "ja", "zh"). ordering: Sort order: -downloads (default), -created, name. limit: Number of results (1-100, default 20). offset: Starting position for pagination.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`offset`	No
`search`	No
`language`	No
`ordering`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), the description reveals the nuanced behavior of the 'image' field: it returns the raw stored URL, may be null, and is not the computed display image. This adds valuable extra context that annotations alone don't provide.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and then provides a cleanly structured Args section. Every sentence adds necessary detail (image nuance, parameter semantics) without fluff, making it appropriately concise for such a rich tool.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (5 parameters, pagination, sorting), the description covers all operational aspects. It explains parameter semantics, image behavior, and default values. An output schema exists, so not detailing return values is fine, making the description complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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

Parameters5/5

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

With 0% schema coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining every parameter: search targets name/description/publisher, language is a code prefix, ordering lists valid options with defaults, and limit/offset have ranges and defaults. This is far more than the bare schema provides.

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 clearly states the tool browses published Bible verse collections with search, filter, and sort capabilities. It uses a specific verb ('browse') and resource ('collections'), and distincts from siblings (detail and metrics) by focusing on list/search behavior.

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?

The description provides clear context for when to use this tool: to browse/search collections with filtering and pagination. It doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives or name sibling tools, but the context is unambiguous given the sibling names.

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

All Remember Me Collections tools Inspect

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

A4.5/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool serves a distinct purpose: browsing/searches, retrieving full details, and viewing engagement metrics. No overlap in functionality.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: browse_collections, get_collection_detail, get_collection_metrics. The pattern is uniform and predictable.

Tool Count5/5

With 3 tools, the server is well-scoped for a read-only collection browsing and metrics use case. Each tool earns its place, and the count is within the typical 3-15 range.

Completeness3/5

The read-side coverage (browse, detail, metrics) is solid, but there are no create, update, or delete operations, and the get_collection_detail description mentions create_collection/add_verse tools that are not present. This suggests notable gaps in the expected lifecycle coverage.

Resources

Need Help?