getfund

Create application

getfund_create_application

Idempotent

Creates the application for a queue card (trackerItemId); idempotent, returns existing:true when the application exists; an archived record is reopened (reopened:true). browserTool names the browser tool that fills the form (e.g. playwright); without one the call errors with browser_tool_required and the install command. Needs applications:write and the Autopilot plan.

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": {
      "trackerItemId": "<trackerItemId>",
      "browserTool": "<browserTool>"
    },
    "name": "getfund_create_application"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`startupId`	No
`browserTool`	Yes
`trackerItemId`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, it discloses idempotent return behavior, archived-record reopening, the browserTool prerequisite, the specific browser_tool_required error, and permission/plan requirements. These are meaningful behavioral traits for a mutation operation.

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?

The description is dense but front-loaded, putting the core create action before edge cases and prerequisites. It uses semicolons effectively, though the single-sentence structure is slightly run-on.

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?

For a create tool with no output schema, it covers return indicators, error behavior, permissions, and plan requirements well. The main gap is the unexplained startupId parameter, which leaves one part of the input semantics incomplete.

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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It explains trackerItemId as the queue card and browserTool as the browser tool used to fill the form, with playwright as an example, but it does not explain the optional startupId parameter at all.

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 states a specific verb and resource: creates an application for a queue card identified by trackerItemId. This clearly distinguishes it from read-oriented siblings such as getfund_application and from submission tools.

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?

It gives relevant operating context: the call is idempotent, existing applications return existing:true, archived records are reopened, and Autopilot plus applications:write are required. It does not explicitly name alternatives for when not to use it, but the creation scenario is clear.

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

All getfund tools Inspect

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

Need Help?