Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ponisha-mcp

ponisha-mcp

by Kia-Karami
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

ponisha_get_user_reviews

Read-only

Retrieves reviews and comments left for a specified Ponisha user, with pagination options for browsing results.

Instructions

Get reviews/comments left for a user.

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": {
      "username": "<username>"
    },
    "name": "ponisha_get_user_reviews"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNo
per_pageNo
usernameYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations already establish an external read operation, and the description is consistent with them. Beyond identifying the content as reviews/comments, it adds no operational context such as authentication or profile-visibility requirements, result ordering, or behavior when no reviews exist.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence states the operation without filler or repetition. Its wording is compact and immediately understandable.

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 simple three-parameter read, the required username can be inferred and the optional pagination parameters have schema defaults, making the definition minimally usable. With no output schema or parameter descriptions, however, explicit parameter semantics, pagination guidance, and access-context details remain notable 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description needs to compensate. "Left for a user" weakly clarifies that the username identifies the review subject, but the description never names that parameter or explains how page and per_page control pagination.

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 verb "Get" and resource "reviews/comments" clearly describe retrieval of feedback left for a user; "left for" also suggests reviews about the user rather than reviews written by them. It does not explicitly differentiate the tool from siblings such as ponisha_get_profile.

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?

The description implies using the tool when feedback about a user is needed, but provides no explicit prerequisites, exclusions, or alternatives. It also does not clarify whether it supports the current user, arbitrary other users, or both.

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