Skip to main content
Glama

build_entree

Create a custom Chipotle entree by selecting your preferred type, protein, rice, beans, and toppings to build a personalized order.

Instructions

Build a Chipotle entree with your preferred ingredients. This is the core of any order.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
entreeYesType of entree
proteinYesChoice of protein
riceYesChoice of rice
beansYesChoice of beans
toppingsYesList of toppings
double_proteinNoDouble the protein (extra charge)

Implementation Reference

  • The 'build_entree' tool is registered and implemented in index.js. It accepts entree specifications (protein, rice, beans, toppings, etc.) and returns a formatted receipt with price calculations and a random quip.
    server.tool(
      "build_entree",
      "Build a Chipotle entree with your preferred ingredients. This is the core of any order.",
      {
        entree: z.enum(ENTREES).describe("Type of entree"),
        protein: z.enum(PROTEINS).describe("Choice of protein"),
        rice: z.enum(RICES).describe("Choice of rice"),
        beans: z.enum(BEANS).describe("Choice of beans"),
        toppings: z
          .array(z.enum(TOPPINGS))
          .min(0)
          .max(TOPPINGS.length)
          .describe("List of toppings"),
        double_protein: z
          .boolean()
          .default(false)
          .describe("Double the protein (extra charge)"),
      },
      async ({ entree, protein, rice, beans, toppings, double_protein }) => {
        // Price calculation (very scientific)
        let price = { Burrito: 10.75, Bowl: 10.75, "Tacos (3)": 10.75, Salad: 10.75, Quesadilla: 11.5, "Kid's Meal": 6.25 }[entree] || 10.75;
        if (double_protein) price += 3.75;
        if (toppings.includes("Guacamole")) price += 2.95;
        if (toppings.includes("Queso Blanco")) price += 1.65;
    
        const item = {
          entree,
          protein: double_protein ? `Double ${protein}` : protein,
          rice,
          beans,
          toppings,
          price: price.toFixed(2),
        };
    
        const receipt = [
          `## Your ${entree}`,
          "",
          `Protein: ${item.protein}`,
          `Rice: ${rice}`,
          `Beans: ${beans}`,
          `Toppings: ${toppings.length > 0 ? toppings.join(", ") : "None (you monster)"}`,
          "",
          `Price: $${item.price}`,
          "",
          `> ${getRandomQuip()}`,
        ];
    
        return {
          content: [{ type: "text", text: receipt.join("\n") }],
          _item: item,
        };
      }
    );
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. 'Build' implies creation but doesn't disclose what gets returned (entree ID? object?), whether this persists to a cart/session, if it's idempotent, or side effects. Missing behavioral contract for a mutation tool.

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?

Two sentences with no redundancy. However, given lack of annotations and output schema, the brevity leaves gaps; a third sentence covering return value or workflow placement would improve utility without sacrificing clarity.

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?

With 6 parameters (5 required) and 100% schema coverage, input side is well-covered by schema. However, zero annotations and missing output schema means description should explain the return value or state change. It doesn't, leaving behavioral context incomplete for a mutation tool of this complexity.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline applies. Description generically references 'preferred ingredients' which loosely maps to parameters but adds no specific syntax guidance, validation rules, or examples beyond the exhaustive schema documentation.

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?

Clear verb 'Build' with specific resource 'Chipotle entree', and 'core of any order' distinguishes from auxiliary siblings like nutrition facts or line forecasting. However, it doesn't clarify distinction from 'customize_order' or 'place_order' in the workflow.

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?

States 'This is the core of any order' implying when to use (when constructing an order), but lacks explicit when-NOT-to-use guidance or workflow sequencing relative to siblings like 'customize_order' or 'place_order'.

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/YoshiSaurus/mcp-otle'

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