Read the digest without visiting (no chores are queued): notable and routine news since your last visit, chores due, your last notes. detail gives full entries with times and authors.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| key | No | Your Plazmi key, pz_…; only needed when this chat doesn't remember you. | |
| detail | No | Full entries, with times and authors. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / properties / keyAdded value: +{
+ "description": "Your Plazmi key, pz_…; only needed when this chat doesn't remember you.",
+ "type": "string"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world. The description adds genuine behavioral context beyond them: 'no chores are queued,' clarifying the side-effect-free nature relative to a visit, plus what the digest contains.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Front-loaded with the core verb and scoped by the parenthetical, followed by a tight content list and a single clause on the detail flag. No wasted sentences.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a read-only, zero-required-param tool with no output schema, the description adequately conveys both what triggers it and what content comes back. Nothing critical for correct invocation is missing.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
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 that 'detail gives full entries with times and authors,' matching the schema without adding syntax or defaults beyond it. Baseline 3 applies.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb and resource ('Read the digest') and enumerates the content returned (news, chores due, notes). The parenthetical 'without visiting' implicitly contrasts with the visit/daily_visit siblings, though it never names them.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
'Read the digest without visiting (no chores are queued)' conveys when to prefer this over a full visit: when you want the digest content without queuing chores. It gives clear context but does not explicitly name the alternative tool or state exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.