Skip to main content
Glama

wattpad_story_recommendations

Read-only

List the stories Wattpad recommends alongside a given story and return each one's id, title, author, votes, reads, chapter count, language, category ids and tags. Use this to find comparable or competing fiction after identifying a story; Wattpad returns at most 18 and does not page.

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": {
      "story_id": "<story_id>"
    },
    "name": "wattpad_story_recommendations"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum recommendations to return, 1 to 20; defaults to 20
story_idYesNumeric Wattpad story id, such as 344352588; a wattpad.com/story link is also accepted

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

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations cover read-only/open-world, but the description adds genuinely new behavior: a hard ceiling of 18 results and no pagination — which importantly tempers the schema's limit of 1–20. Stopping short of explaining ordering/why those 18 is the only gap.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and return fields, then the usage cue and the pagination caveat. No 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?

With an output schema, annotations and full param docs, the remaining essential context is the 18-item/no-paging constraint, which is present. Slightly incomplete on result ordering or what happens for a story with no recommendations.

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 story_id and limit are already fully documented. The description only contributes the 18-item cap that constrains the limit parameter; it adds no format or edge-case guidance beyond that, which is the baseline for full schema coverage.

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 ('List the stories Wattpad recommends alongside a given story') and enumerates the returned fields, making it unmistakable what this does versus siblings like wattpad_story_parts or wattpad_search.

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 explicit usage context ('Use this to find comparable or competing fiction after identifying a story'), including the prerequisite that a story must already be identified. No named alternatives or exclusions, so short of a 5.

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.