Skip to main content
Glama

Sweeppea MCP

by com.sweeppea.mcp

create_todo

Create a new internal To-Do item. ADMIN ONLY: This tool requires admin privileges. Non-admin users will receive a 403 Forbidden error from the API. FORMAT: Only these HTML tags are allowed in description: , , , , . NEVER insert scripts, iframes, event handlers (onclick, onerror, etc.), style tags, or any executable code. SPACING: Do NOT use   — it creates ugly blank blocks in the UI. Use for line breaks within text only.

create_todo

When to use

Create a new internal To-Do item. ADMIN ONLY: This tool requires admin privileges. Non-admin users will receive a 403 Forbidden error from the API. FORMAT: Only these HTML tags are allowed in description: , , , , . NEVER insert scripts, iframes, event handlers (onclick, onerror, etc.), style tags, or any executable code. SPACING: Do NOT use   — it creates ugly blank blocks in the UI. Use for line breaks within text only.

Parameters to validate before calling

  • title (string, required) — To-Do title (max 200 characters).

  • priority (number, required) — one of: 1, 2, 3 — Priority level: 1 = Low, 2 = Medium, 3 = High.

  • description (string, optional) — Detailed description (max 20,000 characters). Allowed HTML: , , , , . No scripts, iframes, or executable code.

  • resource_affected (string, optional) — Resource affected (e.g. "renaissance", "api", "aws", "general"). Default: "general".

  • pin (boolean, optional) — Pin this To-Do to the top. Default: false.

  • deadline (string, optional) — Deadline date in ISO 8601 format (e.g. "2026-03-01").

Notes

  • Admin-only tool

  • Allowed HTML tags: b, strong, i, hr, br

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pinNoPin this To-Do to the top. Default: false.
titleYesTo-Do title (max 200 characters).
deadlineNoDeadline date in ISO 8601 format (e.g. "2026-03-01").
priorityYesPriority level: 1 = Low, 2 = Medium, 3 = High.
descriptionNoDetailed description (max 20,000 characters). Allowed HTML: <b>, <strong>, <i>, <hr>, <br>. No scripts, iframes, or executable code.
resource_affectedNoResource affected (e.g. "renaissance", "api", "aws", "general"). Default: "general".

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only indicate readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context: admin privileges required, non-admin users receive 403, and specific HTML formatting constraints for the description parameter. This goes beyond the annotations to clarify authorization and input validation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is highly repetitive, with admin-only and HTML constraints stated multiple times (intro, 'When to use' section, Notes). The opening paragraph mixes purpose with formatting/spacing rules before the parameter list. While it has headings, the redundancy inflates length without adding value.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description covers the key operational context: admin-only access, 403 behavior, and HTML restrictions. However, it does not describe the return value or success response, which is notable given the absence of an output schema. It also repeats information, which detracts from completeness. Overall adequate but with gaps.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description repeats parameter details in the 'Parameters to validate before calling' section but adds no new meaning beyond the schema. It does emphasize validation, but that is procedural guidance, not additional parameter semantics.

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 'Create a new internal To-Do item' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like update_todo, delete_todo, and fetch_todos. The 'internal' qualifier adds specificity.

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?

The description includes a '## When to use' heading but the content only repeats the purpose and admin-only constraint. It does not explicitly compare to alternatives like update_todo or delete_todo, nor does it state when not to use the tool. Usage is implied rather than explicitly guided.

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

All Sweeppea MCP 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

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools follow a clear resource+action pattern (fetch_* for lists, get_* for single items, create/update/delete for writes), making them distinguishable. A few near-overlaps exist (fetch_billing_transactions vs fetch_wallet_transactions, draw_winners vs schedule_drawing) but the descriptions clarify the boundaries.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names consistently use snake_case verb_noun, with fetch_ for list operations and get_ for single-item retrieval. Some verb variation (add_participant, count_participants, draw_winners, schedule_drawing) deviates from the dominant create/fetch/update/delete pattern but remains predictable and readable.

Tool Count1/5

With 83 tools, this is far beyond a well-scoped server (typically 3-15, with 25+ considered too many). Even though the platform has broad functionality, the sheer number of tools creates significant agent confusion and selection overhead.

Completeness4/5

The sweepstakes domain is thoroughly covered: lifecycle management, participants, groups, rules, drawings, winners, calendar, notes, todos, tickets, surveys, invoices, billing, files, and entry settings. A few minor gaps exist (e.g., no general participant field update, no archive action) but the surface is remarkably complete for its scope.

Resources