set_response_mark
Assign a response mark to a friend using their friend ID and mark ID.
Instructions
友だちの対応マークを設定する
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| friend_id | Yes | 友だちID | |
| taiou_mark_id | Yes | 対応マークID |
Assign a response mark to a friend using their friend ID and mark ID.
友だちの対応マークを設定する
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| friend_id | Yes | 友だちID | |
| taiou_mark_id | Yes | 対応マークID |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided; the description only states the basic action without disclosing behavioral traits such as idempotency, error handling, or required permissions.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single Japanese sentence that is minimal and to the point, front-loading the purpose without extraneous words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the absence of annotations and output schema, the description is too brief; it lacks information on return values, error conditions, and relationship to sibling tools like list_taiou_marks.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides for both parameters.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the action ('set the response mark of a friend') with a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like add_tag_to_friend or list_taiou_marks.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites or exclusions mentioned.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/mediiiiium/mcp-jp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server