Skip to main content
Glama

ask-gpt

Read-only

Get a second opinion from GPT for advisory insights. Pass an expert persona to receive targeted responses for your prompt.

Instructions

Single-provider second opinion via codex (advisory, single-shot). Pass expert to apply one of the expert personas.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
promptYes
expertNo
developerInstructionsNo
cwdNo
reasoningEffortNo
filesNo
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds 'advisory' and 'single-shot', confirming no state modification and clarifying it is a stateless one-query tool. This goes beyond the basic annotation without contradicting it.

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 two sentences and front-loaded with the core purpose. It is concise and efficient. However, the structure could be improved by listing key parameters or providing a quick example.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given 6 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and multiple sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values, how `files` works, or the effect of `reasoningEffort`. The context is sufficient for a very simple tool but not for this complexity.

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 description is the sole source of parameter meaning. It only explains `expert` ('apply one of the expert personas') but does not describe `prompt`, `developerInstructions`, `cwd`, `reasoningEffort`, or `files`. This leaves most parameters unclear.

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?

Description clearly states 'Single-provider second opinion via codex (advisory, single-shot)'. It specifies the verb (ask/advisory), resource (codex/GPT), and scope (single-provider). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like ask-gemini or ask-grok, which are also single-provider tools.

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 usage as a second opinion tool ('advisory, single-shot') and mentions passing the `expert` parameter. But it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this over siblings (e.g., ask-all, ask-one) or when not to use it. No alternatives or exclusions are provided.

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/antonbabenko/deliberation'

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