WhenPeak

whenpeak_best_window

Find today's best time window for one kind of work, using the stored sleep
history of the account this server is configured with.

Returns a start and end time for the window and the projected capacity
across it, tuned to the kind of work: analytical, creative, learning or
administrative.

Choose this tool when the user wants a slot for a task later today. Use
whenpeak_performance_now for the current moment instead, and
whenpeak_quick_predict when working from sleep the user describes rather
than stored history.

Requires WHENPEAK_API_KEY on the server and reads that one account's
history, so it is only meaningful where the server runs with the user's own
key. Without a key it returns a not_configured error rather than failing.
Read-only and stores nothing, but each call counts against that account's
monthly quota.

Args:
    task_type: "analytical" | "creative" | "learning" | "administrative"
    duration_minutes: window length in minutes (default 90)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`task_type`	No		analytical
`duration_minutes`	No

TDQS

A5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, and it excels: it states that the tool is read-only, stores nothing, requires WHENPEAK_API_KEY, reads only that account's history, returns a not_configured error without a key, and each call counts against the monthly quota. It also clarifies the limitation that it's only meaningful where the server uses the user's own key.

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-organized and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by output, usage guidance, and then caveats. Each sentence provides distinct value—no filler. The length is justified by the number of behavioral notes and alternatives it must convey, and it remains readable.

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 there is no output schema, the description adequately explains the return (start/end time and projected capacity). It covers purpose, when to use, requirements, error behavior, quota impact, and parameter semantics. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does: it lists the allowed values for task_type ('analytical' | 'creative' | 'learning' | 'administrative') and specifies duration_minutes as 'window length in minutes (default 90)'. This adds meaningful semantics beyond the schema's type/default declarations.

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 uses a specific verb ('Find'), a precise resource ('today's best time window for one kind of work'), states the data source (stored sleep history), and lists the output (start/end time and projected capacity). It also names the four work types explicitly, making the tool's function unmistakable and differentiating it from siblings.

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 gives explicit 'when to use' guidance ('when the user wants a slot for a task later today') and names two alternatives with clear conditions ('whenpeak_performance_now for the current moment', 'whenpeak_quick_predict when working from sleep the user describes'). This fully routes the agent to the correct tool.

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

All WhenPeak tools Inspect

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

A4.9/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct temporal scope: right now, today's best window, a single day, or a multi-day span. The descriptions explicitly cross-reference when to use each, so an agent should not confuse them.

Naming Consistency4/5

All tools share the whenpeak_ prefix and consistent snake_case, making the set recognizable. However, the suffixes mix noun phrases (best_window, performance_now) with verb phrases (multiday_predict, quick_predict), so the pattern is not perfectly uniform.

Tool Count5/5

Four tools is a well-scoped size for this server's purpose: assessing current performance, finding a window today, predicting one day, and projecting multiple days. No tool feels redundant or missing.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the main prediction workflows: current state, today's slot, single-day curve, and multi-day forecast. Since the server is read-only prediction, CRUD operations are not expected, and there are no obvious dead ends.

Resources

Need Help?