Skip to main content
Glama

YouSpot

by com.youspot

Connect brain objects

connect_graph_objects

Connect two objects in the user's graph with a directed edge — e.g. connect a file or note to a project, a person to a company, a web link to an event. Use the object_ids that create, search, or list returned. connection_type names the relationship ('part_of', 'works_at', 'related_to', …); connecting twice with the same type is a no-op, not an error.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
to_object_idYesThe edge points here (e.g. the project).
from_object_idYesThe edge starts here (e.g. the file).
connection_typeNoRelationship name (default 'related_to').

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The annotations only indicate readOnlyHint=false, so the description bears the burden of explaining mutation behavior. It does so well by disclosing that connecting twice with the same type is a no-op rather than an error, and by clarifying the directed nature of the edge.

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 compact and front-loaded, using two dense sentences. Every clause adds information: action, examples, ID provenance, connection_type semantics, and idempotency behavior. There is no filler or repetition.

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?

For a three-parameter mutation tool with a full schema and no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It covers edge direction, relationship types, ID provenance, and duplicate behavior. It could be more complete by explicitly stating what response to expect or by naming when to use disconnect_graph_objects, but these are minor gaps.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining that from_object_id is the edge's start, to_object_id is its endpoint, and connection_type is a relationship label with examples. It also advises using object_ids from create/search/list, which helps with parameter selection.

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 action ('connect two objects with a directed edge'), identifies the resource ('the user's graph'), and provides concrete examples. It clearly distinguishes from sibling operations like disconnect_graph_objects or merge_graph_objects through the directed-edge concept.

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 implies the tool is for linking existing objects and tells the agent to use object_ids returned by create/search/list. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives such as disconnect_graph_objects, merge_graph_objects, or create_graph_object, leaving some inference required.

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

All YouSpot 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

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools are scoped to a distinct resource and action, and descriptions do a good job separating close pairs like search_connections vs ask_about_connections or get_my_linkedin_posts vs linkedin_analytics. However, the multiple deletion tools (delete_graph_object, delete_graph_objects, purge_graph_object) and the several file-reading tools are easy to confuse without reading the descriptions carefully.

Naming Consistency4/5

The vast majority of tools follow a clear verb_noun pattern such as create_, get_, list_, search_, send_, and delete_. A handful of noun-phrase outliers like linkedin_analytics, mutual_connections, top_message_correspondents, and what_needs_attention break the pattern, so it is highly consistent but not perfect.

Tool Count1/5

64 tools is an extreme count, far beyond the typical well-scoped 3-15 tool range and even beyond the 25+ threshold for 'too many'. While the server covers many integrations, this many tools creates a heavy navigation burden and would be better split into focused servers per domain.

Completeness3/5

Core graph/CRM operations and read-side integration coverage are strong, with search, get, list, and create tools across most domains. However, there are notable dead ends: no delete_calendar_event, no tracker management beyond create_tracker, and set_follow_up explicitly lacks a read-back query tool, so some natural user requests cannot be completed through the toolset.

Resources