Skip to main content
Glama

Dayze — Life in Days + Notable People

by com.dayze

Money Between People

get_money_between_people
Read-onlyIdempotent

Same as get_person_transactions: authenticated user ↔ one contact via expenses FKs. Prefer get_person_transactions; this alias exists for agent discoverability. ($0.10; API key required)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toNoInclusive YYYY-MM-DD filter
fromNoInclusive YYYY-MM-DD filter
nameNoSurface name if person_id unknown
limitNoMax rows 1–200, default 50
person_idNoCRM people.id

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNo
modelNo
totalsNo
entriesNo
person_idNo

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful context beyond annotations: the data relationship via expense foreign keys, an API key requirement, and the $0.10 cost. This is meaningful additional behavioral and operational information.

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?

The description is extremely compact: three sentences carry the functional equivalence, preferred usage, and operational requirements. It is front-loaded and every clause earns its place.

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, combined with full parameter schema, annotations, and output schema, gives the agent everything needed to invoke the tool correctly. It covers when to use it, what it does, cost, and authentication, with no material 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%, so the schema documents all five parameters. The description does not add parameter-specific meaning, but it is not required to compensate because the schema is already complete. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states this tool retrieves money/transactions between the authenticated user and one contact, and explicitly equates it with get_person_transactions. It uses a specific resource and relationship scope, and the naming of the preferred sibling distinguishes it from the broader transaction tools.

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?

Usage guidance is explicit: prefer get_person_transactions, and only use this alias for discoverability. This directly tells the agent when to choose the alternative and when this tool is acceptable, leaving no ambiguity.

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

All Dayze — Life in Days + Notable People 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

B3.2/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Many tools have explicit 'prefer X' guidance and mostly target distinct resources, but get_money_between_people is literally an alias for get_person_transactions, get_context_pack and get_life_context overlap heavily, and upload_asset/upload_photo both upload and re-encode images. Detailed descriptions partially rescue it, but the agent still faces avoidable near-duplicates.

Naming Consistency4/5

The vast majority follow verb_noun snake_case conventions (get_, log_, update_, search_, delete_, add_, archive_, resolve_, etc.). Deviations like the notable_* family and verbose aliases such as get_money_between_people are internally consistent subdomain patterns rather than chaotic naming. No camelCase or mixed style conventions appear.

Tool Count1/5

At 71 tools this far exceeds the 50+ threshold for an extreme tool count. Each domain may have legitimate operations, but the sheer volume would make agent navigation and tool selection expensive. Many listing, search, and upload variants could be consolidated without losing functionality.

Completeness3/5

The set broadly covers calendar, food, people, inventory, money, travel, assets, photos, Gmail, memories, and notable-people lookup with mostly CRUD-style operations. Notable gaps include no delete_expense, no delete_person, and no direct food-diary listing/getter, so some lifecycles end in workarounds. Overall it is broad but not fully complete.

Resources