Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Bryti

by app.bryti
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Keep dinners cheap

upsert_price_class_rule
Idempotent

Set how dear dinners may be, every day or on the weekdays named: Cheap, or CheapOrMid. Bryti prices each dinner from store prices; there is no amount in kroner. A rule about the same thing is changed, not added twice. Soft unless the household says it must hold.

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": {
      "ceiling": "<ceiling>",
      "strength": "<strength>"
    },
    "name": "upsert_price_class_rule"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ceilingYesThe dearest class allowed: Cheap, or CheapOrMid.
strengthYesSoft unless the household says the rule must hold. Hard ONLY when the words are must/never/always (må/aldri/alltid/skal/kan ikke/ikke lov). Everything else is Soft — a preference the planner may bend on a tight week — including a bare statement said in passing («Taco på fredager», «Fisk to ganger i uka», «Maks 30 minutter på hverdager») and helst/gjerne/prøv. «Maks», «minst» and a number name the limit, not its strength: they do not make a rule Hard.
weekdaysNoThe weekdays the rule holds on; omit for every day.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already flag a non-readonly, idempotent, non-destructive mutation, and the description adds real domain context: prices are derived from store prices, so ceilings are classes not kroner amounts, and rules merge rather than duplicate. It stops short of saying what happens to an already-planned week or what a conflicting rule does.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the action and the allowed values, with each sentence carrying distinct information (scope, pricing model, upsert behavior, default strength). The phrasing is idiosyncratic ('how dear dinners may be') but not padded.

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 three-parameter rule upsert with no output schema, the description covers purpose, scope, mutation semantics and the strength default. The remaining gap is downstream effect — whether existing plans are re-evaluated — which an agent would want before calling.

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; the description earns an extra point by clarifying that 'ceiling' is a price class rather than a money amount ('there is no amount in kroner') and by restating the Soft default that governs 'strength'. The weekday semantics ('omit for every day') remain entirely in the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The verb+resource is conveyed ('Set how dear dinners may be... Cheap, or CheapOrMid') and the upsert semantics are stated explicitly ('A rule about the same thing is changed, not added twice'). It never literally names the artifact as a price-class rule nor contrasts with delete_rule/get_rules, so sibling differentiation is implicit rather than stated.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It gives scoping context ('every day or on the weekdays named') and a default-strength policy, which implies when to use it. There is no explicit when-not, no mention of alternatives such as delete_rule for removing a ceiling, and no guidance on whether the plan must be replanned afterward.

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

All Bryti 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