Skip to main content
Glama

bullet

Analyze bullet point lists using cognitive research to improve recall and scanning. Get actionable feedback on length, hierarchy, and structure with a 0-100 score.

Instructions

Validate and improve bullet point lists using evidence-based cognitive research.

This tool analyzes bullet lists against scientifically-validated principles for optimal recall, scanning efficiency, and comprehension. Use it to ensure your summaries follow best practices.

INPUT MODES:

  • Flat mode: Use "items" for simple lists (3-7 items recommended)

  • Sectioned mode: Use "sections" for long documents with multiple topics/chapters

    • Each section has its own title and items array

    • The 3-7 item rule applies PER SECTION, allowing unlimited total content

WHEN TO USE:

  • Before finalizing any bullet list summary

  • When creating documentation, reports, or reference materials

  • To score existing bullet content against research standards

  • For guidance on improving list structure

KEY PRINCIPLES ENFORCED:

  1. List Length (3-7 items per section, 5 optimal): Working memory limits mean more items decrease recall

  2. Hierarchy (max 2 levels): Breadth over depth for better comprehension

  3. Serial Position: Place critical info first and last (U-shaped recall curve)

  4. Line Length (45-75 chars, 66 optimal): Typography research on readability

  5. Parallel Structure: Consistent grammar enables faster scanning

  6. First Two Words: Critical for reader fixation and scanning decisions

CONTEXT AWARENESS:

  • document: Optimizes for scanning and reference (default)

  • presentation: Warns that visuals may be more effective (43% more persuasive per research)

  • reference: Optimizes for quick lookup

  • Per-section context override supported in sectioned mode

SCORING:

  • 0-100 scale with letter grades (A/B/C/D/F)

  • Per-rule breakdown with research citations

  • Per-section breakdown in sectioned mode

  • Actionable improvement suggestions ranked by impact

Returns JSON with score, grade, issues, and top improvements.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleYesTitle/heading for the bullet list (e.g., "Email Thread Summary")
descriptionYesBrief summary or context about what the bullets cover
introYesIntroductory phrase before the bullets (e.g., "Here are the main topics:")
itemsNoArray of bullet items to validate (flat mode). Use this OR sections, not both.
sectionsNoFor long documents, group bullets into sections. Each section is validated separately. Use this OR items, not both.
contextNoUsage context affects recommendations. Default: document. In sectioned mode, this is the default context (sections can override).
Behavior4/5

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden. It explains the tool analyzes, validates, and improves lists, returns a JSON with score and issues, and enforces scientific principles. It does not mention destructive actions or auth needs, but as a validation tool, the behavior is clear. Could be slightly more explicit about whether it modifies input.

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 well-structured with clear sections (INPUT MODES, WHEN TO USE, KEY PRINCIPLES, etc.) and front-loaded with the main purpose. While it is lengthy, the detail is justified by the tool's complexity (6 parameters, nested objects). Each section adds value, but a few sentences could be trimmed without loss.

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 the relatively complex input schema (6 parameters with nested objects) and no output schema, the description is exceptionally complete. It covers input modes, usage context, principles enforced, scoring output structure, and even per-section context overrides. An agent can fully understand how to invoke the tool and what to expect.

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 is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context beyond the schema by explaining flat vs sectioned mode, the 3-7 item rule per section, and context options. This additional guidance helps the agent select the correct parameter combination, justifying a 4.

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 validates and improves bullet point lists using cognitive research. It specifies the action (validate, improve), the resource (bullet lists), and the methodology (evidence-based cognitive research). This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from any sibling (none provided).

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 includes a 'WHEN TO USE' section with explicit scenarios like finalizing summaries, creating documentation, and scoring content. It also explains the difference between flat and sectioned modes. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or provide alternatives, missing a small opportunity for full guidance.

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/nikkoxgonzales/bullet-mcp'

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