Hustlin

Generate the growth plan

plan

Generate (or refresh) the product's growth plan and queue the first actions: the four-week plan, directory listings, first posts, a launch timeline, outreach and ad drafts. When the product has a goal (sync_context goals, e.g. "50 paying customers by January"), the plan is built against it: the horizon runs to the deadline, the weekly volume follows the pace the number needs, the channel mix favours what moves that metric, and every queued action carries a goalFit line. Returns right away with the step list and the goal as read; the work runs in the background for a few minutes. Call actions afterwards to see what was queued. Owner only.

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": {
      "productId": "<productId>"
    },
    "name": "plan"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`force`	No	Re-run on a product that already has a plan. Steps already done are skipped, not duplicated.
`productId`	Yes	The product id.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Adds substantial behavior beyond the annotations: the call is asynchronous ("Returns right away with the step list... the work runs in the background for a few minutes"), it discloses the access constraint ("Owner only"), and it states that `force` skips completed steps rather than duplicating them. These are the kind of operational facts that prevent wasted polling and permission errors, and none of them are in the structured fields.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and its outputs, then the goal behavior, then the return/timing semantics. The goal sentence is dense and long but each clause carries real information; the channel enumeration could be trimmed slightly 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?

With only two parameters, no output schema, and an async workload, the description still covers what is returned, how long the work takes, what to call next, and who may invoke it. Nothing an agent needs in order to call this correctly 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% with only two parameters, both fully documented, so the baseline is 3. The description's mention of refresh and skipped steps largely restates the `force` schema text, and it adds no syntax or format detail for `productId`. Adequate but not additive.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource ("Generate (or refresh) the product's growth plan") and enumerates exactly what gets produced: four-week plan, directory listings, posts, launch timeline, outreach and ad drafts. It also names the sibling to call next ("Call actions afterwards"), so an agent can separate it from `run` or `actions` without opening a schema.

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?

Usage context is clear: call it for a fresh plan or to refresh with `force`, and it hooks into sync_context goals. It also gives sequencing guidance (call `actions` afterwards). It stops short of explicit when-not-to-use or a named alternative (e.g. vs `run`), so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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

All Hustlin tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.