Skip to main content
Glama

Boosthis

by com.boosthis
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Record Change

boosthis_record_change

File a change you made here, so the next assistant knows - Boosthis cannot see code or commits. Kept as YOUR claim, never evidence. Passwords, keys and personal details are refused. This one writes.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
doneNoThe name from intend, now finished.
intendNoOne thing you are starting - a route as the app registers it, or a migration, a fix.
subjectNoThe screen, endpoint or job it touched.
summaryNoWhat you changed, in one or two sentences (max 300 characters).
account_tokenYesDurable account token: dashboard "Connect AI once" card.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / done
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The name from intend, now finished.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / intend / description
      Previous value: -"One thing you are about to build, named as the app registers it: GET /orders/:id."New value: +"One thing you are starting - a route as the app registers it, or a migration, a fix."
    • changedInput schema / properties / subject / description
      Previous value: -"Optional. The screen, endpoint or job it touched."New value: +"The screen, endpoint or job it touched."
    • changedInput schema / properties / summary / description
      Previous value: -"What you changed, in one or two plain sentences (max 300 characters)."New value: +"What you changed, in one or two sentences (max 300 characters)."
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / intend
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "One thing you are about to build, named as the app registers it: GET /orders/:id.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "summary",
-  "account_token"
-]New value: +[
+  "account_token"
+]
  3. Added

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds real value: it discloses the trust semantics ('Kept as YOUR claim, never evidence'), the visibility limit ('Boosthis cannot see code or commits'), and an input refusal policy. That is substantive context beyond the structured hints.

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, front-loaded clauses with no filler; the purpose and constraints come first. Only mild ambiguity in 'File a change' keeps it from a 5.

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 low-complexity write tool with 100% schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers purpose, trust semantics, and input restrictions adequately. It lacks explicit routing among the many sibling tools, a minor gap.

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 each of the five parameters is already documented in the schema. The description adds semantic framing ('claim, never evidence') but no parameter-specific syntax or format guidance, 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: 'File a change you made here, so the next assistant knows.' The purpose of recording a change for continuity is clear, and the constraint that Boosthis cannot see code/commits sharpens the scope. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like boosthis_ai_changes or boosthis_project_diary, so it lands at 4.

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?

It implies you file a change after making one so the next assistant sees it, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no comparison to sibling recording tools. Beyond the data-types it refuses (passwords, keys, personal details), the agent gets no routing help.

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