Skip to main content
Glama

wattpad_part

Read-only

Get one Wattpad chapter by id and return its title, link, word count, reads, votes, comments, dates and the story it belongs to. Use this to check a single chapter's reach after getting the chapter id from wattpad_story_parts; an unknown chapter returns not found and no chapter text is returned.

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": {
      "part_id": "<part_id>"
    },
    "name": "wattpad_part"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
part_idYesNumeric chapter id from the id field of wattpad-story-parts

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesThe tool result payload (shape varies per tool; see each tool's docs resource).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations, it discloses two useful behaviors: an unknown id returns not found, and chapter text is never returned. It does not cover rate limits or pagination, but adds real value on top of the 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?

Two compact sentences, front-loaded with the resource and return payload, followed by the usage cue. The field enumeration is slightly redundant against the output schema but still reads efficiently.

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?

Covers input source, return shape, and error behavior, which is complete enough for a one-parameter read tool. Since an output schema exists, the enumerated return fields are a bonus rather than a necessity.

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 description coverage is 100% ('Numeric chapter id from the id field of wattpad-story-parts'), so the schema already documents the single parameter fully. The description only echoes that the id refers to a chapter, which is baseline behavior when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ('Get one Wattpad chapter by id') plus the returned fields, and implicitly distinguishes itself from wattpad_story_parts and wattpad_part_comments. An agent knows exactly what this retrieves without opening the schema.

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?

Gives an explicit workflow hook: 'after getting the chapter id from wattpad_story_parts', which names the prerequisite sibling tool. It does not explicitly rule out alternatives such as wattpad_part_comments, but the 'single chapter's reach' framing makes the intent clear.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.