Comunicate.top

Potrivirea cu tipul de campanie

check_article_fit

Read-onlyIdempotent

Verifică dacă textul respectă cerințele tipului de campanie (ex. un comunicat are un fapt și un citat; un articol de casino are avertismentul legal) și dacă a rămas ceva de completat. tipDetectat e doar o sugestie.

Use when you need to know if a draft meets a campaign type’s rules before ordering. Do not use when only the SEO quality matters: use check_article_seo.

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": {
      "articleId": "<articleId>"
    },
    "name": "check_article_fit"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`articleId`	Yes	Articolul, din list_articles sau create_article.
`campaignType`	No	Tipul față de care se verifică textul: SEO, BRAND_AWARENESS, PRESS_RELEASE, BRAND_MENTION, CASINO, CRYPTO sau ADULT. Lipsă = tipul detectat din text.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`blocante`	No	number. Blocking findings.
`potrivit`	No	boolean. Whether the text meets the campaign type.
`constatari`	No	array of {cod, severitate, mesaj}.
`deCompletat`	No	array of string. Placeholders the user must fill in.
`tipDetectat`	No	string. Campaign type suggested by the text.
`gataDeTrimis`	No	boolean. Whether it can be ordered as is.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedNov 7, 2026

removedInput schema / $schema

Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"

changedInput schema / properties / articleId / description

Previous value: -"Id-ul articolului (UUID), din list_articles sau create_article."New value: +"Articolul, din list_articles sau create_article."

removedInput schema / properties / articleId / pattern

Removed value: -"^([0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[1-8][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[89abAB][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12}|00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000|ffffffff-ffff-ffff-ffff-ffffffffffff)$"

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": {},
+  "properties": {
+    "blocante": {
+      "description": "number. Blocking findings."
+    },
+    "constatari": {
+      "description": "array of {cod, severitate, mesaj}."
+    },
+    "deCompletat": {
+      "description": "array of string. Placeholders the user must fill in."
+    },
+    "gataDeTrimis": {
+      "description": "boolean. Whether it can be ordered as is."
+    },
+    "potrivit": {
+      "description": "boolean. Whether the text meets the campaign type."
+    },
+    "tipDetectat": {
+      "description": "string. Campaign type suggested by the text."
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed2 schema fields changedNov 7, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / articleId / description

Added value: +"Id-ul articolului (UUID), din list_articles sau create_article."

addedInput schema / properties / campaignType / description

Added value: +"Tipul față de care se verifică textul: SEO, BRAND_AWARENESS, PRESS_RELEASE, BRAND_MENTION, CASINO, CRYPTO sau ADULT. Lipsă = tipul detectat din text."

Changed2 schema fields changedNov 1, 2026

removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```

addedInput schema / properties / articleId / pattern

Added value: +"^([0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[1-8][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[89abAB][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12}|00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000|ffffffff-ffff-ffff-ffff-ffffffffffff)$"

First observedOct 31, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare a safe, idempotent, closed-world read. The description adds context beyond them: it discloses that the result also covers what still needs completing, and that `tipDetectat` is only a suggestion rather than an authoritative value, which matters when interpreting the result. Return-format detail is not needed because an output schema exists.

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 purpose is front-loaded in one dense sentence, followed by a compact when/when-not block; nothing is padded. It loses a point for mixing Romanian prose with an English usage paragraph and for restating the campaign-type checks twice, once as examples and once as rules.

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?

The tool is simple (2 params, one enum), the schema is fully documented, annotations cover the safety profile, and an output schema covers return values. The description supplies purpose, usage, the alternative and a key interpretation caveat, so an agent has what it needs, with only minor room to say more about how results are graded.

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%, and the schema already documents both parameters in detail, including the default behaviour when `campaignType` is missing (detected from the text) and the source of `articleId` (list_articles / create_article). The description adds almost nothing new on parameters apart from the caveat about the detected type, so baseline 3 is right.

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 object: it verifies whether the text meets a campaign type's requirements and whether anything is still missing, with concrete examples (a press release needs a fact and a quote; a casino article needs the legal warning). That is concrete enough that an agent can tell it apart from check_article_seo and the rest of the catalogue without opening either schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The second paragraph gives an explicit when: 'before ordering', i.e. checking whether a draft meets a campaign type's rules. It also gives an explicit when-not plus the named alternative: use check_article_seo when only SEO quality matters. Both the condition and the alternative sibling are named outright, so no inference is needed.

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

All Comunicate.top 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.