Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Reflex Docs MCP Server

Reflex Docs MCP Server

by itsmeadarsh2008
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

decode_error

Analyze Reflex errors to find relevant documentation, code examples, and search queries for quick resolution.

Instructions

Analyze a Reflex error and find relevant documentation.

Args: error_text: The error message or traceback text context: Optional additional context about what you were doing

Returns: Dict with error class, rx symbols, relevant docs, and search queries used

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": {
      "error_text": "<error_text>"
    },
    "name": "decode_error"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
error_textYes
contextNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions return type and fields, but lacks details on read-only nature, authorization needs, or side effects. Minimal but acceptable.

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?

Front-loaded with main purpose, uses clear Args/Returns structure, no redundant prose. Every sentence adds value.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given output schema exists, description briefly mentions return fields, which is sufficient. Covers all needed info for a simple 2-param tool.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage 0%, so description adds meaning: clarifies 'error_text' is the error message/traceback and 'context' is optional additional context. Defines each parameter's purpose beyond type alone.

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?

Description clearly states the tool analyzes errors and finds documentation, with a specific verb 'analyze' and target resource 'Reflex error'. It distinguishes from siblings that retrieve documentation or components.

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?

Implied usage for error analysis, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use compared to alternatives. Could mention searching docs directly for non-error queries.

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