Skip to main content
Glama

Boosthis

by com.boosthis
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get Rule

boosthis_get_rule
Read-only

Full detail for one rule: title, when_to_apply, evidence, and - for a registered project - the fix_template. fix_available: false means no fix text is served here; fix_note says what would change that. counterparts names the same idea's rule in other languages; also_applies_here names the other places in THIS project it applies, with a count.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesRule id, e.g. 'split-driver-jitter'
skipNoThe `part` id of one also_applies_here entry that does not need doing. Recorded permanently: never raised again for this project.
route_labelNoThe route or screen being worked on, so the places listed leave out the one already open.
skip_decided_byNoWho decided to skip it. Use 'developer' when the person said so.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / route_label / description
      Previous value: -"Optional. The route or screen being worked on, so the places listed leave out the one already open."New value: +"The route or screen being worked on, so the places listed leave out the one already open."
    • changedInput schema / properties / skip / description
      Previous value: -"Optional. The `part` id of one also_applies_here entry that does not need doing. Recorded permanently: never raised again for this project."New value: +"The `part` id of one also_applies_here entry that does not need doing. Recorded permanently: never raised again for this project."
    • changedInput schema / properties / skip_decided_by / description
      Previous value: -"Optional. Who decided to skip it. Use 'developer' when the person said so."New value: +"Who decided to skip it. Use 'developer' when the person said so."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / route_label / description
      Previous value: -"Optional. The route or screen being worked on, so the other affected places leave out the one already open."New value: +"Optional. The route or screen being worked on, so the places listed leave out the one already open."
  3. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / route_label / description
      Previous value: -"Optional. The route or screen being worked on, so the list of other affected places leaves out the one already open."New value: +"Optional. The route or screen being worked on, so the other affected places leave out the one already open."
    • changedInput schema / properties / skip / description
      Previous value: -"Optional. The `part` id of one also_applies_here entry that does not need doing. Recorded permanently: that part is never raised again for this project."New value: +"Optional. The `part` id of one also_applies_here entry that does not need doing. Recorded permanently: never raised again for this project."
    • changedInput schema / properties / skip_decided_by / description
      Previous value: -"Optional. Who decided to skip it. Use 'developer' when the person said so themselves."New value: +"Optional. Who decided to skip it. Use 'developer' when the person said so."
  4. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / route_label / description
      Previous value: -"Optional. The route or screen currently being worked on. Used only so the list of other affected places leaves out the one already open."New value: +"Optional. The route or screen being worked on, so the list of other affected places leaves out the one already open."
    • changedInput schema / properties / skip / description
      Previous value: -"Optional. The `part` id of one entry in this rule's also_applies_here list that has been considered and does not need doing. Recorded permanently — that part is never raised again for this project, so it is worth being sure."New value: +"Optional. The `part` id of one also_applies_here entry that does not need doing. Recorded permanently: that part is never raised again for this project."
  5. First observed

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint=false, so the description usefully adds that fix_template is served only for a registered project and that fix_available:false is accompanied by a fix_note explaining what would change it. It does not describe the skip-persistence side effect (which lives in the schema) or any error behavior for unknown ids.

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-loads the core action ('Full detail for one rule') and then enumerates the return fields in roughly the order an agent would consume them. Dense but essentially waste-free, though the two-sentence block is somewhat run-on.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing return shape and does so thoroughly: title, when_to_apply, evidence, fix_template, fix_available, fix_note, counterparts, also_applies_here with count. Only error/missing-rule behavior and the skip write semantics are unaddressed.

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%, so all four parameters including the enum for skip_decided_by are already documented in structured data. The description adds no syntax or format detail about id, skip, or route_label, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: 'Full detail for one rule,' which contrasts clearly with boosthis_list_rules and boosthis_match_rules_for_code by being singular. It does not name those siblings explicitly, so differentiation is inferred 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 Guidelines2/5

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

There is no statement of when to call this versus boosthis_list_rules or boosthis_match_rules_for_code, nor of prerequisites such as needing a rule id obtained from a prior call. Usage is only weakly implied by 'one rule' and by the mention of a registered project.

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

All Boosthis 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