Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
qzone-mcp

qzone-mcp

by komoretz
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

qzone_get_feed_list

Retrieve a specified QQ number's Qzone feed posts with tid, content, and timestamps, and get tid values needed before posting comments.

Instructions

获取指定 QQ 号的说说列表，返回 tid、内容、时间等。评论前需先用本工具拿到 tid。

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": {
      "targetUin": "<targetUin>"
    },
    "name": "qzone_get_feed_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countNo获取条数，默认 5
targetUinYes目标空间 QQ 号

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose return fields and the comment prerequisite, which is valuable, but omits permission/login requirements (a sibling check_login exists), page size or truncation behaviour, and whether the list is complete or capped.

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?

Two short sentences with zero filler: the first defines the resource and returns, the second gives the prerequisite. Front-loading is correct and nothing is repeated.

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?

For a two-parameter reader with full schema coverage and no output schema, explaining the returned fields and the tid dependency is nearly sufficient. The main gap is the absent note about login/authentication preconditions before the call can succeed.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented in the schema. The description restates that the uin is a QQ number target and that count bounds the list size in spirit, but adds no format, range, or default details beyond the schema.

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 and resource ('获取指定 QQ 号的说说列表') plus the payload fields returned (tid、内容、时间), so the agent knows exactly what it retrieves. It does not name a sibling tool, but the resource scope is unambiguous.

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?

Gives a concrete when-to-use rule: call this first to obtain a tid before commenting ('评论前需先用本工具拿到 tid'). This establishes a hard ordering dependency rather than leaving usage to inference, though it does not state any exclusion or alternative for listing cases.

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