Skip to main content
Glama

YouSpot

by com.youspot
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Your day

my_day
Read-only

Today's Your day brief as it was written this morning: the Do list (each person, who they are to the user, why now, its state: 'ready' to send, 'question' waiting on one answer, or 'headsup' to read, the drafted note and what the user already decided on it), the Know lines, Coming up, What ran, and the page link, and brand: today's LinkedIn post and up to three conversations worth joining, each with a drafted comment, and when present who_engaged: who reacted to or commented on their posts this week, people they know with a note and first-timers with a profile link. Pass date (YYYY-MM-DD) for an earlier day. Pass brief to read one part of the day: 'relationship' (the people: Do, Know, Coming up) or 'branding' (the post, conversations and who engaged), as in 'what did my LinkedIn post say Tuesday?' or, from someone still using the old names, 'what did my branding brief say Tuesday?'; it reads only that part. Call it Your day, never two briefs. Pass person (a name, email or Brain object id) to get every item about that person from the last seven days of briefs instead. Call this for 'what do I need to do today?' and 'what's on my plate?' before anything else, and answer with the Do list first. Read-only: it never runs the brief again.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dateNoThe day, as YYYY-MM-DD. Omit for today.
briefNoOnly this part of the day, when the user asked about one. Omit for the whole day.
personNoA name, email or Brain object id; returns that person across the last week.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / brief / description
      Previous value: -"Only this brief, when the user asked about one. Omit for the whole day."New value: +"Only this part of the day, when the user asked about one. Omit for the whole day."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / brief
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Only this brief, when the user asked about one. Omit for the whole day.",
+  "enum": [
+    "relationship",
+    "branding"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. Added

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, but the description adds genuine behavioral context: 'Read-only: it never runs the brief again,' which tells the agent the brief is not regenerated. It also discloses the shape and scope of returned content, though nothing about limits or freshness beyond 'as it was written this morning.'

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The content is accurate but packed into one long run-on paragraph with weak front-loading — it opens by enumerating output fields rather than stating what the tool does. Phrases like 'Call it Your day, never two briefs' and the worked example utterances add bulk without much routing value.

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 no output schema, the description carries the full burden of describing return content, and it does so thoroughly across both brief parts and the person view. An agent has enough to call it correctly and set expectations for the response.

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, but the description adds real meaning: it explains what 'relationship' (the people: Do, Know, Coming up) versus 'branding' (post, conversations, who engaged) actually select, and that `person` spans 'the last seven days of briefs.' That goes beyond the schema's terse field text.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states the resource concretely — 'Today's Your day brief as it was written this morning' — and enumerates its parts (Do list, Know lines, Coming up, What ran, brand). It is identifiable, but it never cleanly separates itself from near-siblings like start_your_day or what_your_day_did by name, leaving the agent to infer the split from the read-only clause.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives explicit trigger phrases ('what do I need to do today?', 'what's on my plate?'), a precedence rule ('call this ... before anything else, and answer with the Do list first'), and routing conditions for `brief` and `person`. It stops short of naming the alternative tools or stating when NOT to use it.

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
Context All Your Agents Can ShareAgents share what they learn, hand off work, and hold it when you switch models. Start with 5 GB free.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources