Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Gud API MCP Server

Gud API MCP Server

Official
by gudlab
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

create_collection

Creates a new API collection in your project by providing a name and optional variables, saving it as a local Gud API file and returning its ID.

Instructions

Create a new collection in the project (.gud-api/collections). Returns its id.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

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

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
variablesNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.2

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the core action and return, omitting details about side effects (e.g., whether existing collections are affected), authorization needs, or behavior on duplicate names.

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 key information. Every word is meaningful with no redundancy.

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 tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description is too minimal. It fails to explain the variables parameter, any default behaviors, or potential errors. Given the absence of annotations and schema descriptions, more detail is needed for complete decision-making.

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?

The input schema has 0% documentation coverage, and the description adds no explanation of the 'name' or 'variables' parameters beyond listing them. It does not clarify the purpose of variables, constraints on names, or how the parameters should be used.

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?

The description clearly states the action ('Create a new collection') and the resource ('in the project (.gud-api/collections)'), and indicates the return value ('Returns its id'). It is specific enough to distinguish from sibling tools like list_collections or get_collection, though it does not explicitly differentiate.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor are prerequisites or context mentioned. The description lacks any 'when-to-use' or 'when-not-to-use' cues.

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