Skip to main content
Glama
rooquiz

RooQuiz

get_record

Read-only

Retrieve a complete submission record by its ID, revealing examinee details, raw answers with masked contacts, UTM metadata, and the full frozen report with dimensions, outcome, and AI evaluation.

Instructions

View the full detail of one submission record (lead) in the current team by its record id (the id field returned by list_records), including the examinee, the submitted answers, UTM metadata and the complete frozen report result (overall / dimensions / outcome / AI evaluation). Answers are returned as the respondent wrote them, except that any email address or phone number inside them comes back masked.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
recordIdYesThe record id (the `id` returned by list_records)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoRecord id — address a submission by this
dataNoThe submitted answers keyed by question code, as typed by the respondent — with any email address or phone number inside them masked
formIdNoThe quiz this submission belongs to
examineeNoThe respondent { id, examineeId, email, name, customData }, PII masked
metadataNoChannel attribution { utmSource, utmMedium, utmCampaign, utmTerm, utmContent, referrer }
reportUrlNoPublic report page URL for this submission
updatedAtNoISO datetime of the last change
shareTokenNoToken that makes this single report page shareable
submittedAtNoISO datetime of submission
reportResultNoThe complete frozen report { status, overallAnalysis, dimensionAnalysis, outcome, aiEvaluation, aiSuggestion }
serialNumberNoPer-form sequence number of the submission

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint and destructiveHint annotations, it discloses meaningful behavior: the returned report is frozen, answers are returned as written, and email addresses or phone numbers are masked. It also clarifies team scope and that the full report structure is included.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose, then efficiently enumerates the significant output components and a special masking behavior. Every sentence carries useful information without filler or unnecessary repetition.

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?

For a single-parameter read tool with rich annotations and an output schema, the description supplies all necessary context: what the record contains, how to identify it, current-team scope, and the masking caveat. Nothing important is missing.

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 coverage is 100% and the description essentially restates the schema's parameter explanation: recordId is the id from list_records. The description adds no new details about the parameter's format, constraints, or behavior beyond what the schema already provides.

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 opens with a precise verb and resource: 'View the full detail of one submission record (lead)...' and explicitly scopes it by record id, distinguishing it from list_records and other sibling tools like get_lead. It clearly states what the returned detail includes.

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 clearly implies when to use it: when you need full detail for one record identified by the id from list_records. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the scoping and id reference give solid context.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

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/rooquiz/rooquiz-mcp'

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