Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ThumbGate

ThumbGate

by IgorGanapolsky
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Hybrid

Open Feedback Session

open_feedback_session
Destructive

Open a feedback session after a thumbs-up or thumbs-down, capturing follow-up messages for 60 seconds to turn reactions into lessons for safer AI actions.

Instructions

Open a feedback session after thumbs up/down. Follow-up messages will be captured for 60s.

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": {
      "feedbackEventId": "<feedbackEventId>",
      "signal": "<signal>"
    },
    "name": "open_feedback_session"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
signalYes
initialContextNo
feedbackEventIdYesThe feedback event ID from capture_feedback

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

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

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint: true. Description adds that follow-up messages are captured for 60 seconds. No contradiction, but does not discuss other effects like session lifecycle or permissions.

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 succinct sentences. Front-loaded with the key action and condition. No unnecessary words.

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?

Covers the basic purpose and temporal constraint. Lacks details on how feedbackEventId relates to previous capture, the role of signal, or what happens after 60 seconds. Adequate but with gaps.

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%). Description does not elaborate on parameters (feedbackEventId, signal, initialContext). The timing detail is helpful but not linked to params.

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?

Clearly states it opens a feedback session after thumbs up/down. Distinguishes from siblings like capture_feedback and finalize_feedback_session by implying it's a follow-up step, but does not explicitly differentiate.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Provides context to use after thumbs up/down, but no explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tools. The sibling list includes many feedback tools, but no guidance on selection.

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