Skip to main content
Glama

CountLink

by app.countlink

Create a chained agenda of timed segments

create_agenda
Read-only

Create a CountLink agenda: an ordered sequence of named, timed segments (intro, talk, break, Q&A) that starts now and advances from one to the next on its own, on every screen that opens the link, with no server involved. Use this when someone describes a meeting, workshop, lesson or event as a sequence of parts with lengths — including when they give you a total and a list of topics and expect you to split it ("an hour, four topics"): do the split yourself, then pass the resulting segments here. By default it starts immediately; pass start_at for something scheduled ahead ("our workshop starts at 9:15 tomorrow") — the link works right away, showing a live countdown to the start rather than the first segment, and switches over on its own at the scheduled instant, in sync on every screen that opened it. Returns the shared link plus a run sheet with the wall-clock start and end of each segment, and an .ics calendar file (one event per segment) in structuredContent.ics — offer it if the person might want the agenda on their calendar. For a single countdown use create_timer instead.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
segmentsYesThe segments in running order. Each has a duration (same grammar as create_timer: "10m", "1h", "90s", "5:00", or a plain number of minutes) and an optional short label. 1–24 segments; the whole agenda must fit in 99h59m59s.
start_atNoOptional ISO-8601 instant for a scheduled start, e.g. "2026-09-08T09:15:00Z" or with a local offset like "2026-09-08T09:15:00+01:00". Omit to start immediately. A start_at already in the past is just treated as already running from that instant.

Schema Changelog

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

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Even with readOnlyHint and destructiveHint annotations already present, the description adds meaningful behavioral detail: it starts immediately by default, advances automatically and in sync on every screen, involves no server, and shows a live countdown before a scheduled start. It also discloses the return payload including the .ics calendar file, with no contradiction to the annotations.

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?

Although the description is a single long paragraph, every sentence carries information: core behavior, when-to-use, splitting instruction, start_at semantics, return artifacts, calendar offer, and sibling alternative. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose and contains no filler or tautology.

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?

The description is sufficient on its own despite the lack of an output schema: it states what is returned (shared link, run sheet, .ics in structuredContent.ics), how to offer the calendar artifact, what happens for scheduled starts, and which sibling is appropriate for a single countdown. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 goes beyond the schema by explaining how to obtain the segments from a user's total-and-topics phrasing and by giving a concrete scheduled-start trigger ('our workshop starts at 9:15 tomorrow'). The actual duration grammar is already documented in the schema, so the description adds usage context rather than duplicating syntax.

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 leads with a specific verb-resource pair ('Create a CountLink agenda') and defines exactly what the resource is: an ordered sequence of named, timed segments that auto-advances. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling by explicitly saying 'For a single countdown use create_timer instead.'

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?

It gives explicit when-to-use guidance: a meeting, workshop, lesson, or event described as parts with lengths, including the case where the user provides a total and topics and the agent must split it. It also names the alternative (create_timer) and covers the scheduled-start case with 'pass start_at for something scheduled ahead.'

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

All CountLink toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct artifact: agendas, timer links, badge images, and link inspection. The descriptions include explicit cross-references (e.g. "For a single countdown use create_timer instead"), so an agent can reliably pick the right tool.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow the same snake_case verb_noun pattern: create_agenda, create_badge, create_timer, and describe_timer_link. There are no mixed casing styles or inconsistent verb conventions.

Tool Count5/5

Four tools is a well-scoped set for this server: one creation tool per core artifact type plus a link inspector. Each tool has a clear purpose and none feel redundant.

Completeness4/5

The core workflows—creating shared countdowns, agendas, and badges, and inspecting CountLink URLs—are covered. Minor gaps exist: there is no explicit iframe-embed tool even though create_badge references embed_on_website's iframe, and describe_timer_link doesn't mention agenda links, but agents can often work around these with the returned links and snippets.

Resources