Skip to main content
Glama

Add a card

add_card

Add a card to your LingoChunk review queue: choose 'vocab' to attach a known word by lemma, or 'custom' to create a freeform card with front and back text.

Instructions

Add a card to the user's LingoChunk review queue (FSRS; it starts as 'new'). kind=vocab adds a word the user ALREADY has in their vocabulary, resolved by lemma against their own content (404 if the lemma is not in their vocabulary; 409 code=ambiguous_lemma if it occurs in several episodes or under several parts of speech, so pass submission_id or pos as the message names). kind=custom adds a freeform card and REQUIRES front, back and submission_id (the episode it anchors to); pass sentence_position to anchor its example to a specific transcript sentence. Omit deck_id and the card goes to the deck for its own submission (the same deck the app builds, reviews and exports that episode from, so it is immediately visible and exportable); an explicit deck_id must belong to that submission (400 otherwise). A 409 code=duplicate_card means the card already exists: expected, not worth retrying. NOTE: deleting the anchoring episode deletes the card (cascade), and a card added while the app's Words tab is open on that episode may be overwritten by the app's own save, so add cards when the app is not actively editing that deck. Requires the cards:write scope.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
posNoPart of speech, to disambiguate the lemma (kind=vocab); case-insensitive.
backNoBack/answer text (kind=custom; max 500 chars).
kindYesvocab = a word from your vocabulary; custom = freeform front/back.
noteNoOptional note shown on the card (kind=custom; max 300 chars).
frontNoFront/prompt text (kind=custom; max 200 chars).
lemmaNoDictionary form to add (kind=vocab).
deck_idNoTarget deck id from list_decks; omit to use the deck for the card's own submission. When given, it must belong to that submission.
submission_idNoDisambiguate the lemma to one episode (kind=vocab); the episode the card anchors to (REQUIRED for kind=custom).
sentence_positionNo1-based transcript position (see get_transcript) to anchor a custom card's example; defaults to the submission's first sentence.
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the card starts as 'new', uses FSRS, and explains cascade deletion, overwrite risks, and required scope (cards:write). Minor omissions like rate limits or response format prevent a 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single dense paragraph that front-loads the core purpose. While comprehensive, it could benefit from breaking into sections for readability. Every sentence adds value, but the length is slightly high for the amount of 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?

Given the tool's complexity (9 params, two modes, error handling, cascade behavior), the description covers most aspects but omits the success response structure. Without an output schema, the agent might need to guess what the response contains, which is a gap for a creation tool.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, but the description adds significant context: for kind=vocab it explains resolution by lemma and error conditions; for kind=custom it clarifies required fields; deck_id behavior is fully detailed. This goes well beyond the schema's minimal descriptions.

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's purpose: 'Add a card to the user's LingoChunk review queue'. It distinguishes between two card types (vocab and custom) with specific behaviors, setting it apart from sibling tools like list_decks or get_transcript.

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?

The description provides explicit when-to-use guidance for each kind, including error handling (404, 409) and a warning about app interference. However, it lacks explicit alternatives or when not to use this tool, though siblings are sufficiently different.

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/lingochunk/lingochunk-mcp'

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