Skip to main content
Glama

Moltline Personal Suite

by com.moltlinestudio

Countdown Days

countdown_days
Read-onlyIdempotent

Count the days until each named event, soonest first. FREE.

Typical input {"events": {"Launch": "2026-10-01", "Trip": "2026-09-05"}} returns {"today": "YYYY-MM-DD", "events": [{"event": "Trip", "date": "2026-09-05", "days_away": 20}, ...]}; a bad date gets a per-event error entry instead of failing the whole call.

Use to rank named dates by how soon they arrive. Not for working-day math, which the timeops server's business_days handles, and not for building a review schedule (spaced_repetition_plan). Errors: on invalid, missing, or malformed input this tool never raises a protocol error — it returns {"error": ""}. Every call is read-only and idempotent, so after correcting the input it is always safe to retry.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
eventsYesMapping of event name to ISO date YYYY-MM-DD, e.g. {"Launch": "2026-10-01"}. The first 30 events are used.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds value by stating 'Every call is read-only and idempotent' and detailing error behavior: 'a bad date gets a per-event error entry' and 'on invalid input never raises a protocol error — it returns an error message'. No contradictions.

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 well-structured: a one-line purpose, a typical input/output example, usage guidelines, and error handling. Every sentence adds value, and it is concise without being overly long.

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?

Given the single parameter and the presence of an output schema, the description covers input format, output format with sample, error handling, limit of 30 events, and comparisons to sibling tools. It is fully complete for the agent to use this tool correctly.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% and the schema description already includes the limit of 30 events. The description goes further by providing a concrete input/output example, clarifying the return format with per-event error entries, and explaining the error structure. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 'Count the days until each named event, soonest first.' It gives a typical input/output example and explicitly distinguishes from siblings like 'business_days' and 'spaced_repetition_plan', making the tool's specific purpose clear.

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?

It explicitly says 'Use to rank named dates by how soon they arrive' and provides exclusions: 'Not for working-day math...' and 'not for building a review schedule...', naming alternatives. It also explains error handling behavior, guiding the agent on when and how to use the tool.

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

All Moltline Personal Suite 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

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools target distinct purposes (budgeting, counting days, skills, finances, scheduling, bill splitting). However, budget_split and savings_goal both deal with personal finance and could be confused by an agent, though their descriptions clarify the difference. Also, get_free_skill, get_full_skill, and get_full_product are related but clearly distinguished by access level and scope.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names use a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern (e.g., budget_split, countdown_days, savings_goal). The only minor deviation is that some verbs are adjectives (free, full) rather than actions, but the pattern is still predictable and readable.

Tool Count5/5

With 9 tools, the set is well-scoped for a personal finance and productivity assistant. Each tool addresses a distinct, useful function without overwhelming the agent or leaving trivial gaps.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers key personal tasks: budgeting, savings goals, event countdowns, spaced repetition, bill splitting, and product exploration. A minor gap is the lack of a tool for expense tracking or recurring bills, but the domain is well-covered for the stated purpose.

Resources