Dayze — Life Context

restore trip

restore_trip

Restore an archive or normalization receipt. Requires restore_id and request_id. Receipts stay restorable for at least 30 days (archived rows are retained, not purged). Refuses intervening edits; repeats are no-ops. ($0; API key required)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`request_id`	Yes
`restore_id`	Yes
`idempotency_key`	No	Alias for request_id.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`rows`	No
`account`	No	The Dayze account this data belongs to. With more than one Dayze connection, name it in the answer.
`changed`	No
`expires_at`	No
`preview_id`	No
`provenance`	No	Which connector wrote the record and which connected Dayze account received it.
`restore_id`	No
`server_time`	No
`candidate_hash`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 3, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / account

Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "description": "The Dayze account this data belongs to. With more than one Dayze connection, name it in the answer.",
+  "properties": {
+    "display_name": {
+      "description": "Account display name.",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "handle": {
+      "description": "Account handle, e.g. @goh.",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "note": {
+      "description": "How to disclose the account to the user.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "qa_fixture": {
+      "description": "True for a known QA test account: its records are fixture data, not a real life.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "handle",
+    "display_name",
+    "qa_fixture",
+    "note"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / provenance

Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "description": "Which connector wrote the record and which connected Dayze account received it.",
+  "properties": {
+    "account": {
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "description": "The Dayze account this data belongs to. With more than one Dayze connection, name it in the answer.",
+      "properties": {
+        "display_name": {
+          "description": "Account display name.",
+          "type": [
+            "string",
+            "null"
+          ]
+        },
+        "handle": {
+          "description": "Account handle, e.g. @goh.",
+          "type": [
+            "string",
+            "null"
+          ]
+        },
+        "note": {
+          "description": "How to disclose the account to the user.",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "qa_fixture": {
+          "description": "True for a known QA test account: its records are fixture data, not a real life.",
+          "type": "boolean"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "handle",
+        "display_name",
+        "qa_fixture",
+        "note"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "channel": {
+      "description": "Always mcp_connector.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "connector": {
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "properties": {
+        "kind": {
+          "description": "oauth or api_key.",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "name": {
+          "description": "The connected app or API-key label shown to the account owner.",
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "kind",
+        "name"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "source": {
+      "description": "chatgpt for ChatGPT OAuth writes; mcp for another OAuth app or API key.",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "source",
+    "channel",
+    "connector",
+    "account"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

AddedSep 16, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Adds substantial behavior beyond annotations: a 30-day restorability window with retained (not purged) rows, idempotent repeat semantics, refusal when intervening edits exist, $0 cost, and API-key auth. Annotations only cover the safety profile (non-read-only, non-destructive, closed-world), so this text carries real added value.

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?

Compact and front-loaded: purpose first, then required inputs, then the retention/idempotency constraints and cost/auth note. Every clause carries information, though the parenthetical pricing/auth tail is slightly telegraphic.

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 an output schema (so return values needn't be described) and safety annotations already in place, the description covers retention, idempotency, edit-conflict behavior, cost, and auth. The main remaining gap is how to source restore_id/request_id, which is a minor omission.

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 coverage is only 33% and neither restore_id nor request_id is documented in the schema, so the description compensates by naming both as required and implying idempotency via 'repeats are no-ops'. It still doesn't explain what a restore_id is or where the agent obtains one, so it only partially fills the gap.

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 (Restore) and resource (archive/receipt), and 'Restore an archive' clearly reads as the inverse of the sibling archive_trip. The phrase 'or normalization receipt' is slightly muddy since the tool is trip-scoped, but an agent can still tell what it does without opening the schema.

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 rather than stated: the agent infers this is the undo path for archive_trip, and conditions like 'Refuses intervening edits' and 'repeats are no-ops' hint at when it succeeds. It never explicitly names archive_trip or tells the agent when NOT to use it.

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

All Dayze — Life Context tools Inspect

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.