Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
wyt-mcp

wyt-mcp

by MLMecham
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

fence

Buy back stolen items from the den at inflated prices by providing the item key.

Instructions

At a den: the crew sells the town's own stolen goods back, at extortion prices. No argument lists the goods; pass item_key to buy.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "fence"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
item_keyNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'extortion prices' implying cost, but lacks details on side effects, state changes, or whether items are permanently removed. The behavioral impact is unclear.

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?

The description is very concise—two sentences—and front-loads the setting and action. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (1 parameter) and the presence of sibling tools, the description covers the basic action but lacks details on how to know which item_key to use, what the costs are, or if there are any restrictions, which are needed for a fully contextual understanding.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the parameter 'item_key' is entirely defined by its name and the description's mention 'pass item_key to buy'. The description does not explain what item_key represents, where to obtain it, or its format, leaving ambiguity.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: buying stolen goods from a den at extortion prices. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'buy' and 'sell' by specifying the context of stolen goods and the location (den).

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'buy' or 'shop'. It does not mention prerequisites or when not to use it, leaving the agent to infer.

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