Dayze — Life Context

Update Time Block

update_time_block

Change one time block by block_id: date, category, start_time, end_time or note (null clears). Fields left out stay. ($0.10; API key required)

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "block_id": "<block_id>"
    },
    "name": "update_time_block"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`date`	No	YYYY-MM-DD.
`note`	No	Note for the block; null clears, e.g. Deep work on the draft.
`block_id`	Yes	Time block id, e.g. 3f2a1b4c-8d9e-6f01-c2b3-c4d5e6f70809.
`category`	No	Time block category, e.g. focus.
`end_time`	No	HH:mm.
`request_id`	No	Client idempotency key (retries return original result).
`start_time`	No	HH:mm.
`idempotency_key`	No	Alias for request_id.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`block`	No
`account`	No	The Dayze account this data belongs to. With more than one Dayze connection, name it in the answer.
`message`	No
`provenance`	No	Which connector wrote the record and which connected Dayze account received it.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedNov 9, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / block_id / description

Added value: +"Time block id, e.g. 3f2a1b4c-8d9e-6f01-c2b3-c4d5e6f70809."

addedInput schema / properties / category / description
```
Added value: +"Time block category, e.g. focus."
```

addedInput schema / properties / note / description

Added value: +"Note for the block; null clears, e.g. Deep work on the draft."

AddedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (which only declare it is a non-destructive, closed-world write), the description discloses the partial-update contract (omitted fields are preserved), the null-clears convention, the cost ($0.10), and the API-key requirement. Those are exactly the operational facts an agent needs before invoking a metered mutation.

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?

Two short clauses: the field list and the partial-update rule come first, followed by the cost/auth parenthetical. Nothing is wasted and the most decision-relevant information is front-loaded.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the description covers the key gaps for a metered mutation: cost, auth, and partial-update behavior. What remains unstated is error behavior (e.g., unknown block_id or invalid category), which is minor for a simple single-record update.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description adds meaning beyond the schema by stating that omitted fields are left unchanged and that null clears a field, which clarifies the edit semantics of the whole parameter set rather than any single field. It does not cover the idempotency_key/request_id aliasing, but that is already documented in the schema.

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 ("Change") and resource ("one time block by block_id") and enumerates the mutable fields, so an agent can tell it apart from add_time_block or get_time_blocks. It stops short of explicitly naming the create/list siblings, but the singular-id framing makes the update semantics unambiguous.

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 by "Change one time block by block_id" and "Fields left out stay," which signals a partial-update pattern rather than a create. There is no explicit when-to-use vs when-not guidance and no mention of alternatives such as add_time_block for new blocks, so the agent must infer the boundary.

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.