Skip to main content
Glama
larrygiroux

QC Database MCP Server

by larrygiroux

create_reference_request

Create a reference request to record that a source item still needs proof. Specify item type, reference type, and optionally assign to a team member with a description.

Instructions

Create a reference request (record that a source item still needs proof). item_type is map_item, itp_item, or list_item. reference_type is 'document' (then give document_folder) or 'custom_form' (then give form_schema). Optionally assign it to a project member and add a description.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
item_typeYes
item_idYes
reference_typeYes
document_folderNo
form_schemaNo
assigned_toNo
descriptionNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It explains the creation action and parameter constraints but lacks details on side effects, permissions, error behavior, or idempotency.

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?

Four concise sentences with front-loaded purpose, accurate parameter details, and no redundant information.

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?

Adequate for creation tool with 7 parameters and an output schema, but lacks explicit contrast with sibling create_reference and does not describe output or error scenarios.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description compensates by explicitly listing allowed values for item_type and reference_type and explaining conditional parameters (document_folder, form_schema). Missing details on item_id and defaults.

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 the tool creates a reference request (a record that a source item needs proof), specifies the allowed values for item_type and reference_type, and distinguishes from sibling create_reference by focusing on pending proof needs.

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?

The description implies when to use (when a source item still needs proof) but does not explicitly state when not to use or contrast with alternatives like create_reference.

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/larrygiroux/qcdatabase_mcp'

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