Skip to main content
Glama
ONDC-Official

ondc-mcp

Official

Report what went wrong

feedback_submit_report

Submit an incident report after attempting resolution, including diagnosis, outcome, and tooling gaps, to help improve future tooling.

Instructions

Record your account of an incident this session opened — you will see one as an ISSUE_OPEN event on a tool result. Call it AFTER you have tried to resolve the problem, so you can say how it turned out; report it whether or not you succeeded, because a failure you could not rescue is the more useful of the two. tooling_gap is the most valuable field: it is what changes the tools you are given next time. Do not paste payload values into any field — name the JSONPath instead; values are stripped either way.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
outcomeYes
attemptedNoWhat you tried, in order, including what did not work.
diagnosisYesWhat you concluded was actually wrong.
session_idYes
incident_idYesFrom the ISSUE_OPEN event, or from feedback_list_reports.
tooling_gapNoWhat would have let you resolve this faster.
suspected_causeYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
stateYesThe **derived** state. If it disagrees with your `outcome`, the report keeps both — that disagreement is itself a finding.
eventsNoWhat has happened in this session since your last call — the participant's callbacks, steps sent automatically, refusals, form submissions. Attached to every session-scoped result and delivered exactly once, so read it here instead of polling. Absent when nothing happened. `more` above zero means call record_get_events for the rest.
messageYes
acceptedYes
incident_idYes
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond annotations, the description reveals that 'values are stripped either way' and that the tooling_gap field 'changes the tools you are given next time'. These behavioral details are not exposed by the annotations (which only cover read-only, open-world, idempotency, and destructiveness) and add meaningful context for the agent.

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?

The description is composed of five concise, purposeful sentences, each adding distinct value: what it does, when to call, why failures are useful, the key field, and the JSONPath rule. No fluff or repetition; the structure is efficient and front-loaded with the core purpose.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a submit-report tool with a rich schema, output schema, and annotations, the description covers the essential context: the trigger (ISSUE_OPEN event), timing, desired content, and a crucial formatting rule. It does not need to repeat return-value details since the output schema exists. The guidance is complete for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The description adds significant meaning for tooling_gap calling it 'the most valuable field' and explaining its effect. It also instructs to reference JSONPath instead of pasting values, which applies to all parameters. Schema descriptions cover most fields, but this extra guidance goes beyond the schema.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Record your account of an incident this session opened'. It specifies the resource (an incident report) and the action (record/submit). It also distinguishes from sibling feedback_list_reports by focusing on submission rather than listing.

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?

The description gives explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Call it AFTER you have tried to resolve the problem' and explains that it should be called whether or not the attempt succeeded. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion cases, but the context is clear enough for an agent to decide when to invoke it.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/ONDC-Official/automation-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server