content-engine-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

capture_seed

Capture a 2–5 line idea into the seed bank and classify it to prepare it for later content drafting and publishing workflows.

Instructions

Capture a 2–5 line idea into the seed bank and classify it.

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": {
      "body": "<body>"
    },
    "name": "capture_seed"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`body`	Yes
`kind`	No
`title`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It signals a mutation ('Capture ... into the seed bank') but says nothing about whether classification is automatic or driven by the supplied kind, whether duplicates are detected, what is returned, or whether the capture is reversible (contrast kill_seed/revive_seed).

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the core action and the size constraint come first. Its brevity is efficient, though it borders on under-specification rather than maximal clarity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a three-parameter mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and zero schema descriptions, the definition is thin but does convey the essential action and a body-length constraint. An agent could call it correctly, but would be guessing on classification behavior and the title field.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds a real constraint on body (2–5 lines) and hints that 'classify' relates to kind, but the ten enum values are never explained and the title parameter is not mentioned at all.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb ('Capture') and resource ('seed bank') plus a concrete input constraint ('2–5 line idea'), so an agent knows this creates a short seed rather than a draft or newsletter. It does not name or contrast with siblings such as save_draft or search_seeds, so sibling differentiation is only implicit in the verb.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, no mention of checking for duplicates via search_seeds, and no routing rule distinguishing a short seed from save_draft content. Usage is only inferable from the '2–5 line idea' phrasing.

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