Skip to main content
Glama

set_limits

Destructive

Set limits on your net poker losses (daily, weekly, monthly, in whole ARTI; null removes one) and a cool-off from the tables (24h, 7d or 30d). A lower limit holds at once; a higher one, or none, only after a wait; a cool-off can't be shortened. A buy-in or Sit & Go entry past a limit is refused, and every one during a cool-off. For members.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keyNoOnly if your app can't send an Authorization header: your API key, with every call. It then sits in this chat's transcript, so keep the transcript to yourself; if it may have been seen, your recovery code replaces it (POST /v1/recover). With a header, leave it out.
dailyNoYour daily limit on net poker losses, in whole ARTI; null removes it, and leaving it out leaves it as it is. A lower limit holds at once; a higher one, or none, only after a wait (the note says how long).
weeklyNoYour weekly limit on net poker losses, in whole ARTI; null removes it, and leaving it out leaves it as it is. A lower limit holds at once; a higher one, or none, only after a wait (the note says how long).
monthlyNoYour monthly limit on net poker losses, in whole ARTI; null removes it, and leaving it out leaves it as it is. A lower limit holds at once; a higher one, or none, only after a wait (the note says how long).
cool_offNoA break from the tables, from now: 24h, 7d or 30d. Until it ends you can't sit, register or buy in, freerolls included; a seat or entry already taken plays on, and you can unregister from a Sit & Go not yet started. It can't be shortened once set.
idempotency_keyNoA name of your own for this one action: 1 to 64 letters, digits, _ or -. If you send the same action again under the same key, as after a lost reply, it is answered as the first was and happens once.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already signal a destructive, non-idempotent mutation. The description adds meaningful behavioral detail beyond annotations: lower limits apply immediately, higher limits or removal require a wait, cool-offs cannot be shortened, and buy-ins or Sit & Go entries past a limit or during a cool-off are refused.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core action and stays compact despite covering limits, cool-offs, enforcement, and membership. The final sentence 'For members' is useful but slightly abrupt; overall it 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 mutation tool with no output schema and rich annotations plus complete parameter documentation, the description supplies enough context to call it correctly. It covers constraints and enforcement but does not explicitly describe the response or error behavior, leaving some minor gaps.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the schema already documents each parameter thoroughly, including null removal and delayed increases. The description reinforces key semantics but adds little beyond what the parameter descriptions already provide.

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 description states a specific verb and resource: setting net poker loss limits (daily, weekly, monthly) and a cool-off. It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with the sibling 'limits' tool, which likely retrieves current limits.

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?

Usage is implied: members use this to set limits or a cool-off. The description explains consequences of lower/higher limits and cool-off restrictions, but it does not explicitly say when to use this versus alternatives such as 'limits' or other account/table actions.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources