Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Taasky

by ai.taasky
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Open a negotiation

negotiation_open

Start a new negotiation: creates a room and returns invite_url for the other party. Use it when your human wants to agree something with someone; if you were sent an invite link instead, use negotiation_join. Each call opens a separate room. subject_schema is the shape of the terms; pass subject to open with your terms, which the other side can accept as soon as they join. For a meeting with a few possible times, pass slots instead: no schema needed, and the other side picks one with a tap. options does the same for any schema. The invitation expires after 72 hours if nobody joins.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slotsNoA meeting with a few possible times: 2 to 6 exact slots, RFC3339 with your human's UTC offset, best first. Leave out subject; subject_schema is optional, one timerange field labelled in your human's language (without it, "meeting_time", labelled in English). Still pass limits: the window your human is free, so a counter outside it is refused. The other side picks a slot with a tap. Their pick counts as their yes, so once your human confirms it, it is agreed.
limitsNoYour human's private limits, by field of your subject_schema. Only Taasky sees them, never the other side, and they cannot be changed later. int/money/date: {min?, max?} in the field's value shape (money {"amount": "100.00", "currency": "EUR"}); timerange: {min?, max?} as RFC3339 times (no start before min, no end after max); enum: {one_of: [...]}; bool: {equals}. Taasky refuses your own terms outside them, flags terms outside them on your human's confirmation, and tells both sides if the two sides' limits cannot meet, without either number.
optionsNoLike slots, for any subject_schema: 2 to 6 alternative terms, best first, each shaped by subject_schema. Leave out subject: the first option is your opening offer. A person who answers in a browser picks one with a tap.
subjectNoYour opening terms, shaped by subject_schema: for a meeting, the exact slot. The same as an offer once they join, made now.
templateNocommon_ground: a shared understanding, not a deal. One list of findings both agents edit (topic, sides, findings, conclusion, next_steps, all text). Nothing in it commits anyone, so approve, reject and cancel go out at once, with no confirmation by your human. The schema is supplied; pass subject_schema only to relabel those same fields in your human's language.
subject_schemaNoShape of what you are negotiating: {field: {type, label, optional?, repeated?, values?, currency?}}. Field names are identifiers: a-z, 0-9, _ ("meeting_time"); `label` is what humans read, in any language. Types and their values: string; int; bool; enum (values: [...]); timerange {start, end} in RFC3339; date "YYYY-MM-DD"; money {amount, currency} with amount a decimal string ("1500.00") and currency ISO 4217 ("EUR"), which `currency` may fix. A meeting or visit is one timerange field, not separate date, time and duration fields; the time zone goes in the values' UTC offset, not in a label. The peer validates against this and the confirmation card is rendered from it.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / template
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "common_ground: a shared understanding, not a deal. One list of findings both agents edit (topic, sides, findings, conclusion, next_steps, all text). Nothing in it commits anyone, so approve, reject and cancel go out at once, with no confirmation by your human. The schema is supplied; pass subject_schema only to relabel those same fields in your human's language.",
+  "enum": [
+    "common_ground"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / previous_room_token
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "The room_token of any earlier negotiation of yours. Your human then gets this one in the same Telegram chat, with no new link to tap.",
-  "type": "string"
-}
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / slots / description
      Previous value: -"A meeting with a few possible times: 2 to 6 exact slots, RFC3339 with your human's UTC offset, best first. Leave out subject_schema and subject: the room is about one \"meeting_time\" timerange, and the other side picks a slot with a tap. Their pick counts as their yes, so once your human confirms it, it is agreed."New value: +"A meeting with a few possible times: 2 to 6 exact slots, RFC3339 with your human's UTC offset, best first. Leave out subject; subject_schema is optional, one timerange field labelled in your human's language (without it, \"meeting_time\", labelled in English). Still pass limits: the window your human is free, so a counter outside it is refused. The other side picks a slot with a tap. Their pick counts as their yes, so once your human confirms it, it is agreed."
  4. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / options
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Like slots, for any subject_schema: 2 to 6 alternative terms, best first, each shaped by subject_schema. Leave out subject: the first option is your opening offer. A person who answers in a browser picks one with a tap.",
+  "items": {
+    "additionalProperties": {},
+    "propertyNames": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "maxItems": 6,
+  "minItems": 2,
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / slots
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "A meeting with a few possible times: 2 to 6 exact slots, RFC3339 with your human's UTC offset, best first. Leave out subject_schema and subject: the room is about one \"meeting_time\" timerange, and the other side picks a slot with a tap. Their pick counts as their yes, so once your human confirms it, it is agreed.",
+  "items": {
+    "properties": {
+      "end": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "start": {
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "start",
+      "end"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "maxItems": 6,
+  "minItems": 2,
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • removedInput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "subject_schema"
-]
  5. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare openWorldHint=true, non-idempotent, non-destructive, so the bar is lower. The description adds substantial context beyond them: each call opens a separate room, the invite expires after 72 hours, and limits are private to the caller's side and immutable. It stops short of describing what a failed or duplicate open does, but the disclosed behavior is well above baseline.

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 purpose, return value, and routing before the mode-specific detail; nearly every sentence carries a distinct fact. It is dense and long for a description, with the slots/options/expiry facts packed closely, but no sentence is pure filler.

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 six-parameter, zero-required, open-world creation tool with nested objects and no output schema, the description covers return shape (invite_url), lifecycle (72-hour expiry), privacy model (limits never shown to the peer), and the non-binding template caveat. An agent has enough to choose a mode and call correctly.

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 the baseline is 3, but the description earns above it by explaining cross-parameter relationships the schema states only piecemeal: leave out subject when passing slots, options is 'the same for any schema' with the first option as the opening offer, and subject_schema is the shape that renders the confirmation card. This is relational meaning, not restatement.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Start a new negotiation'), names the concrete side effect ('creates a room'), and the return value ('returns invite_url'). It also explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling negotiation_join, so an agent can route between the two 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 Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives an explicit when-to-use ('when your human wants to agree something with someone') and an explicit when-not with the alternative named ('if you were sent an invite link instead, use negotiation_join'). It further routes between the three opening modes (subject, slots, options/template) with conditions for each.

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

All Taasky toolsInspect
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.

Resources