Kitchen Timer

What is next in a meal plan

meal_status

Read-onlyIdempotent

Say what is next in a meal plan made with plan_meal, and how long until it. Give the plan's code (the last part of its link). Only reads; never changes a plan. Give the control key too, if you have it, to also see the timers on the phone.

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": {
      "code": "<code>"
    },
    "name": "meal_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`key`	No	Optional: the plan's secret control key. With it the answer also says whether the person has started the timers on the phone and what each one is doing.
`code`	Yes	The plan's code, or its whole link.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`code`	Yes
`next`	No
`links`	No	Each dish that starts after another dish: {dish, number, after, afterNumber, when: 'goes in'\|'is done', minutes, text}. Keep these when you change the plan.
`state`	Yes
`timers`	No	Only with the key, once the phone has started: each dish's state on the phone.
`claimed`	No	Only with the key: a phone has tapped Start.
`upcoming`	No
`readyAtMs`	Yes
`serverNowMs`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 27, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / links

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Each dish that starts after another dish: {dish, number, after, afterNumber, when: 'goes in'|'is done', minutes, text}. Keep these when you change the plan.",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

First observedOct 22, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The read-only and idempotent annotations already establish safety, but the description reinforces this with 'Only reads; never changes a plan.' It also adds useful behavioral detail that the optional control key extends the answer to include phone timer status, which is beyond the basic read behavior.

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 short, front-loaded with the primary action, and every sentence contributes: purpose, code input, read-only assurance, and optional key effect. No filler or redundant repetition beyond a useful safety reinforcement.

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?

With a full output schema, complete parameter descriptions, and rich annotations, the description gives enough context for correct invocation. It covers the core action, key input, optional timer behavior, and read-only nature; nothing an agent needs is missing.

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 both parameters are already documented. The description restates the code as 'the last part of its link' and the key's purpose for timer visibility, but adds little syntax or format detail beyond the schema; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb and resource: reporting what is next in a meal plan and the time remaining. It also explicitly ties the tool to plans made with plan_meal, so an agent can distinguish it from the sibling mutation tools without inspecting their schemas.

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?

It gives concrete invocation guidance for the code and optional control key, and the phrase 'made with plan_meal' implies the post-planning context. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this over other tools or when not to use it, so usage remains mostly implied rather than fully spelled out.

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

All Kitchen Timer 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.

Resources

Need Help?