Flash

panel_grade

Used by Flash's study panel only; never call it yourself (use submit_review). Records the grade the user tapped and returns the panel's next card.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`rating`	Yes	1=Again 2=Hard 3=Good 4=Easy
`card_id`	Yes
`session_id`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`card`	No
`deck`	No	The session's deck and tags as asked for: the tags are the header's chips, and both let the panel start the session again after allowing more new cards; start only.
`tags`	Yes
`view`	Yes	Which of the panel's views this is: always `study`.
`state`	Yes	`card` (one to show), `held` (today's limits hold the rest back), `caught_up` (nothing due), or `empty` (no cards in the scope at all).
`preload`	Yes	Signed links to warm: this card's back and the next card's front.
`recorded`	Yes	False only from panel_grade, when the card had already been graded elsewhere (in the chat) and this grade was not recorded.
`reviewed`	Yes	Reviews recorded in this session so far, in the panel or the chat: with `remaining`, the panel's progress ("2 / 10").
`remaining`	Yes	Cards in the queue, this one included.
`deck_label`	No	The deck as the site shows it (`Cardio › ECG`), for the panel's header; start only.
`session_id`	Yes
`held_by_limit`	Yes	Cards today's limits hold back.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedSep 28, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / reviewed

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Reviews recorded in this session so far, in the panel or the chat:\nwith `remaining`, the panel's progress (\"2 / 10\").",
+  "format": "uint32",
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "integer"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / view

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Which of the panel's views this is: always `study`.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedOutput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "session_id",
-  "state",
-  "remaining",
-  "held_by_limit",
-  "preload",
-  "recorded",
-  "tags"
-]New value: +[
+  "view",
+  "session_id",
+  "state",
+  "remaining",
+  "reviewed",
+  "held_by_limit",
+  "preload",
+  "recorded",
+  "tags"
+]

AddedSep 27, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the mutation/safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful context that this path exists for Flash's study panel only and that it returns the next card, but with an output schema present that return behavior is partly redundant.

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?

Two economical clauses with zero padding, and the most decisive information (never call it yourself) is front-loaded. Nothing is wasted, though the sentence carries multiple jobs.

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 tool the agent is told not to invoke, the description covers the essentials: who calls it, why not you, and what to use instead. The return value is covered by the existing output schema. The only real gap is the undocumented card_id/session_id parameters.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 33% – only 'rating' is documented ('1=Again 2=Hard 3=Good 4=Easy'), while card_id and session_id carry no meaning in schema or description. The description offers no compensating parameter guidance, so an agent relying on prose gains nothing here.

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 and resource ('Records the grade the user tapped') plus its return ('the panel's next card'), and explicitly distinguishes itself from submit_review. Clear enough for an agent to know what it does, though the statement leans on exclusion rather than elaboration.

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?

Explicit when-not guidance ('never call it yourself') and a named alternative ('use submit_review'). This is as unambiguous as usage guidance gets, leaving nothing to inference.

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

All Flash 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.