Skip to main content
Glama
commune-dev

commune-mcp

Official
by commune-dev

submit_feedback

Submit feedback about Commune to the product team. Report errors, request features, or share observations for improvement.

Instructions

Submit feedback about Commune to the product team.

Use this tool whenever you encounter something worth reporting — an error, a missing capability, or an observation about what's working well or could be improved.

Three feedback types:

"error" — the API returned a non-2xx status, the response shape was wrong, or behavior was incorrect (not just unexpected). Include context: which tool you called, what you expected, what happened. Example: "list_threads returns 500 when the inbox has never received a message."

"feature" — you need a capability that doesn't exist yet. Be specific about the use case. Example: "Need cursor-based pagination on search_threads — current limit cap blocks processing large backlogs."

"signal" — the API succeeded but quality, latency, or behavior was unexpected. Also use for positive observations. Example: "Semantic search quality on long threads is excellent — intent matching across 40+ messages works." Example: "Thread metadata endpoint is slow (~3s) on inboxes with 1000+ threads — expected <500ms."

The optional context dict lets you attach structured metadata that makes feedback actionable. For errors, include the tool name, any IDs, and status codes. For features, include the related tool and your use case.

Args: type: Feedback type — "error", "feature", or "signal" message: Clear description of the feedback (max 4000 chars) context: Optional structured metadata, e.g. {"tool": "list_threads", "inbox_id": "inb_123", "status_code": 500}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeYes
messageYes
contextNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, but the description discloses message length limit (4000 chars) and optional context usage. It does not mention side effects or rate limits, but for a feedback tool, the behavioral information is adequate.

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 well-structured and front-loaded with purpose, but moderately long. Every sentence adds value, though it could be slightly more concise without losing substance.

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

Completeness4/5

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

The description covers purpose, usage guidelines, parameter semantics, and includes examples. It lacks explanation of the return value (output schema exists but not described), but for a feedback submission tool, the completeness is sufficient.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description adds significant meaning: explains enum values ('error', 'feature', 'signal'), provides context example, and states max chars for message, adding value beyond the bare 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 'Submit feedback about Commune to the product team' and elaborates on three specific feedback types, distinguishing this tool from sibling tools that focus on threads, inboxes, and domains.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly says 'Use this tool whenever you encounter something worth reporting' and provides detailed guidance for each feedback type (error, feature, signal) with examples, making it easy for an agent to decide when to invoke this tool.

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/commune-dev/commune-mcp'

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