Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ThumbGate

ThumbGate

by IgorGanapolsky
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Hybrid

Append Feedback Context

append_feedback_context
Destructive

Attach a follow-up message to an open feedback session after a thumbs-up/down. Use it to capture why the action was approved or blocked.

Instructions

Append a follow-up message to an open feedback session. Call this when the user types additional context after giving thumbs up/down.

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": {
      "sessionId": "<sessionId>",
      "message": "<message>"
    },
    "name": "append_feedback_context"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
roleNouser
messageYesThe follow-up message from the user
sessionIdYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.23.1
  2. Removedv1.21.2
  3. Addedv1.16.9

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint: true, but description describes only an append operation, which is typically non-destructive. Fails to disclose any destructive behavior or side effects, contradicting the annotation.

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 purpose, no redundant information. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Description covers usage scenario but omits details about the 'role' parameter and any behavioral traits beyond the annotation contradiction. No output schema, so more completeness would be beneficial.

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 coverage is low (33%), with only the 'message' parameter having a description. The tool description does not add any information about 'sessionId' or 'role' parameters, failing to compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

Description clearly states action (append), resource (feedback session), and context (after thumbs up/down). Distinguishes from sibling tools like open_feedback_session or finalize_feedback_session.

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?

Provides a clear scenario: 'Call this when the user types additional context after giving thumbs up/down.' Does not explicitly list when not to use or alternatives, but the scenario is specific enough.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools