Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@zeph-to/mcp-server

@zeph-to/mcp-server

by zeph-to
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

zeph_dismiss

Idempotent

Dismiss a push notification by ID to mark it as read and remove it from the user's feed after processing.

Instructions

Dismiss (mark as read) a specific push notification by ID. Use after processing a notification to clear it from the user's feed.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "pushId": "<pushId>"
    },
    "name": "zeph_dismiss"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pushIdYesPush ID to dismiss (e.g., "push_01HX...")

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.11.2
  2. Removedv1.11.0
  3. Addedv1.10.0
  4. Removedv1.9.2
  5. First observedv0.0.0-semantic-release

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already provide behavioral hints (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true). The description adds that it clears from the feed, but this is already implied by 'dismiss'. No contradictions; score is adequate but not enhanced.

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?

A single concise sentence that front-loads the action and purpose. No wasted words, and the structure is efficient.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple tool with one required parameter and annotations providing behavioral context, the description is fairly complete. It covers what, when, and how. Minor gap: could mention nondestructive nature, but annotations already cover that.

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% with a clear description and example for pushId. The description adds no further parameter details beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb (dismiss), resource (specific push notification), and action (mark as read). It distinguishes from the sibling zeph_dismiss_all by specifying 'by ID' vs. all.

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 explicitly says to use after processing a notification, giving clear context. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use or comparison to other sibling tools, though the distinction is implied.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools