Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

YouSpot

by com.youspot
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Merge brain objects

merge_graph_objects
Destructive

Merge two duplicate records in the user's graph into one, person or company only. Every connection moves from the duplicate onto the kept record, fields the kept record lacks are copied over (never overwritten), and the duplicate is removed. Call with preview=true first and emit the merge_compare card it names: the card shows both records and merges when the user clicks, so never merge without an explicit yes. keep_id survives; merge_id goes. unmerge_graph_objects puts it back.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keep_idYesThe record that survives (exact object_id).
previewNoReturn what the merge would do without doing it. Call this first.
merge_idYesThe duplicate to fold in and delete.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / preview
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Return what the merge would do without doing it. Call this first.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Added
  3. Removed
  4. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and the description earns extra credit by disclosing exactly what happens: connections move, missing fields are copied but never overwritten, and the duplicate is deleted. Minor gap: it doesn't state permission/auth requirements or whether merges are rate-limited, but the destructive semantics are well covered.

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?

Four tight sentences, front-loaded with what happens (scope, effects), then the confirmation protocol, then reversibility. No filler; each clause carries operational information.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description still covers the preview return (a merge_compare card), the mutation effects, and the undo path. An agent has everything needed to call this safely without guessing.

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 baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning beyond the schema: 'keep_id survives; merge_id goes' disambiguates direction of the merge, and preview is tied to a required first step plus a UI card. That's more than the schema's terse field descriptions.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Merge two duplicate records in the user's graph into one') and narrows scope ('person or company only'). Clear which sibling this is versus unmerge_graph_objects, delete_graph_object, or list_duplicate_suggestions.

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?

Explicitly prescribes the workflow: call with preview=true first, emit the named merge_compare card, and never merge without an explicit yes. It also names the reversal path (unmerge_graph_objects) so the agent knows the alternative for undoing rather than avoiding the call.

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
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