Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Mailganer API MCP

Mailganer API MCP

by dkanster
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

list_crosslink_gaps

Identify API documentation and Postman requests missing crosslinks, with documented reasons for each gap.

Instructions

List docs and Postman requests without crosslinks, with documented reasons

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_crosslink_gaps"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.1

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavior. It only says 'with documented reasons' but does not explain what reasons are, how the list is generated, or any side effects. Lacks detail on read-only nature or data source.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with action and resource. No wasted words.

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?

No output schema, so description should explain return format. It mentions 'documented reasons' but does not specify what those reasons are or how they are represented. Adequate but leaves ambiguity about the output structure.

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?

No parameters exist, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no param info beyond the schema. Baseline for 0 params is 4, but the description does not enrich meaning about output or context; it only restates the tool's purpose.

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 it lists docs and Postman requests without crosslinks, with documented reasons. The verb 'List' and specific resource distinguish it from sibling tools like check_doc_page or rebuild_doc_crosslinks.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. Does not specify prerequisites, nor when not to use, nor mention sibling tools like rebuild_doc_crosslinks for fixing gaps.

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