Skip to main content
Glama

Moltline Personal Suite

by com.moltlinestudio

Get Full Product

get_full_product
Read-onlyIdempotent

Load one product in full: its persona plus every paid skill. PREMIUM (license).

Typical input {"slug": "inbox-assistant"} returns {"slug": ..., "name": ..., "persona": "", "skills": [{"name": ..., "instructions": ...}, ...], "free_skill": {...}}.

Returns persona plus every skill for one product. Use when the caller wants the whole product. Not for a single skill (get_full_skill) and not for a free look, which list_products and get_free_skill provide with no plan. Errors: on invalid, missing, or malformed input this tool never raises a protocol error — it returns {"error": ""} (for example {"error": "unknown slug ''"}). Every call is read-only and idempotent, so after correcting the input it is always safe to retry.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugYesProduct slug exactly as returned by list_products, e.g. "inbox-assistant".

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint), the description discloses error handling behavior: 'on invalid, missing, or malformed input this tool never raises a protocol error — it returns {"error": ...}.' It also mentions the 'PREMIUM (license)' prerequisite, adding useful context without contradicting annotations.

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?

The description is well-structured, front-loading the core purpose, then providing a concrete example, usage guidance, error handling, and idempotency note. It is efficient, though a few phrases could be trimmed without losing clarity.

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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (one parameter, comprehensive annotations, output schema exists), the description covers purpose, usage, errors, and idempotency. The mention of 'PREMIUM (license)' is brief but sufficient for context. Overall, it provides enough information for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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?

The input schema already describes the 'slug' parameter with high coverage (100%). The description adds a typical input example and shows the output shape, but does not significantly extend the semantic meaning of the parameter itself. Baseline 3 is appropriate as schema does the heavy lifting.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Load one product in full: its persona plus every paid skill.' It uses a specific verb ('load') and resource ('product'), and explicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_full_skill and get_free_skill, making its scope unambiguous.

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?

The description provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use when the caller wants the whole product.' It also specifies when not to use it, naming alternative tools: 'Not for a single skill (get_full_skill) and not for a free look, which list_products and get_free_skill provide with no plan.'

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