Skip to main content
Glama
arbadacarbaYK

gittr-mcp

by arbadacarbaYK
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

publishSoftwareAnnounce

Publishes NIP-82 software release announcements to Nostr relays from a fetched forge payload and private key, enabling decentralized app distribution.

Instructions

Low-level: publish NIP-82 events from an already-fetched forge payload (ok:true + hashed announceable binary). Prefer announceSoftwareFromForgeRelease.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
appIdNo
forgeYesPayload from fetchForgeReleases with hash:true
relaysNo
topicsNo
appNameNo
iconUrlNo
licenseNo
privkeyYes
summaryNo
homepageUrlNo
ownerPubkeyNo
nip34AddressNo
screenshotUrlsNo
selectedApkUrlNo
selectedAssetUrlNo
assetUrlOverridesNodownloadUrl → public Blossom HTTPS blob URL
includeSiblingAssetsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv1.0.9
    • addedInput schema / properties / homepageUrl
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / iconUrl
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / screenshotUrls
      Added value: +{
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
  2. Changed3 schema fields changedv1.0.6
    • addedInput schema / properties / assetUrlOverrides
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "downloadUrl → public Blossom HTTPS blob URL",
+  "type": "object"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / includeSiblingAssets
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / selectedAssetUrl
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. First observedv1.0.3

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. Calling it 'publish' implies an outbound write to Nostr relays, and the required privkey element signals signing/auth, but the description never states that publishing is an irreversible public broadcast, what happens on relay failure, or how it relates to the sibling deleteSoftwareAnnounce.

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, no filler, with the low-level nature and the sibling preference front-loaded. Dense NIP-82 jargon slightly reduces immediate readability, but nothing is wasted.

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?

For a 17-parameter write tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is far too thin: it omits default relay behavior, which parameters are required vs optional in practice, and what the caller receives on success or partial relay failure. The one precondition it does give is the most valuable part, but the rest is missing.

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?

17 parameters with only 12% schema description coverage, and the description compensates almost nothing: it explains only the forge payload's expected shape (ok:true + hashed binary). appId, relays, topics, privkey, ownerPubkey, selectedApkUrl, assetUrlOverrides, and includeSiblingAssets are left undocumented in both the schema and the description.

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?

States a specific verb (publish) and resource (NIP-82 events) plus the exact input precondition (already-fetched forge payload with ok:true and hashed binary). The 'Low-level:' prefix and the pointer to announceSoftwareFromForgeRelease make it distinguishable from that sibling without opening either schema.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent to prefer the sibling announceSoftwareFromForgeRelease, implying this low-level variant is the fallback for when a forge payload has already been fetched. It does not spell out the scenario where you would deliberately choose this over the wrapper (e.g. batching multiple publishes or reusing one payload), so it falls just short of full when-to-use guidance.

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