Skip to main content
Glama

Namaste America

by us.namasteamerica
OverviewAdmin

submit_correction

Propose a correction to a listing field (agents/users reporting bad data).

`vertical` is the category key (default 'restaurants'); `listing_id` is the id from that category's
get_/search_ tools. Correctable restaurant fields: phone, email, website, menu_url, address_full,
city, state, region_tag, price_range, cuisine_type, festival_specials. The correction is stored and
applied by the Feedback agent — automatically for unclaimed listings, or routed to a human for
claimed/featured ones. Identity fields (name, coordinates) are not correctable. Structured field
corrections currently apply to restaurants; for other categories use submit_review to flag issues
(or the owner portal). Returns {ok, feedback_id|error}.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fieldYes
valueYes
reasonNo
verticalNorestaurants
listing_idYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / listing_id
      Added value: +{
+  "title": "Listing Id",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / restaurant_id
      Removed value: -{
-  "title": "Restaurant Id",
-  "type": "integer"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / vertical
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "restaurants",
+  "title": "Vertical",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "restaurant_id",
-  "field",
-  "value"
-]New value: +[
+  "listing_id",
+  "field",
+  "value"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Discloses full behavior: correction storage, automatic application for unclaimed listings, human routing for claimed/featured, and return format. No annotations provided, so description carries full burden and satisfies it.

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?

Well-structured with purpose first, then parameter details, then behavior. Slightly lengthy but each sentence adds value; could be trimmed minimally.

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?

Complete coverage of tool behavior, parameters, return values, and integration with other tools. Output schema exists but description already states return format; no gaps in understanding.

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?

Adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema: explains vertical as category key with default, listing_id source, and lists all correctable fields. Schema has 0% description coverage, so description is essential and thorough.

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?

Clearly states 'Propose a correction to a listing field' and distinguishes from siblings like submit_review by noting that for other categories or structured field corrections, submit_review or owner portal should be used.

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?

Explicitly provides when to use (correcting listing fields) and when not (identity fields not correctable, other categories use submit_review). Includes details on automatic vs. human routing based on listing claim status.

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

All Namaste America toolsInspect
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.

Resources