Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Morris Golf

by golf.morris
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get handicap roadmap

get_handicap_roadmap
Read-onlyIdempotent

The player's 6 or 9 month roadmap to lower their handicap: one phase per quarter, each with one measurable figure to close it, from where they lose strokes on their federation cards hole by hole (doubles, par 3s, putts). Returns the one Morris keeps for them, or one built for this answer that is not kept. Only when they ask for it. Read-only.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_handicap_roadmap"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
freshNotrue to build it again from today's cards instead of returning the one kept.
monthsNoLength of the roadmap: 6 or 9 months. Default 9.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotency and closed-world behavior, and the description's 'Read-only' restates that. The valuable addition is the persistence nuance: a roadmap may be the stored one Morris keeps or a throwaway built for this answer and not retained, which is behavior the annotations do not convey. It stops short of explaining cost or latency of rebuilding.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The first clause front-loads what the roadmap contains and how it is derived, then the second sentence covers persistence and the usage gate. It is dense but every clause carries information; the 'Morris keeps for them' phrasing is slightly opaque and costs a small amount of clarity.

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?

For a two-optional-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description supplies the structure of the return value (one phase per quarter with one measurable figure), its data source, and its persistence semantics. An agent has enough to decide when to call it and what it will receive.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% and both parameters are already documented, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the kept-vs-fresh distinction ('one built for this answer that is not kept') and the 6/9-month framing, but adds no syntax or behavior beyond what the schema states.

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 gives a specific verb+resource: building a 6- or 9-month handicap-lowering roadmap with quarterly phases and one measurable closing figure, derived from hole-by-hole federation-card stroke losses. It implicitly separates itself from get_handicap, project_handicap and simulate_handicap by being a phased plan rather than a number, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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?

It states an explicit gating condition: 'Only when they ask for it,' which tells the agent not to volunteer this tool. It also tells the agent that an unstored build is possible without asking for a rebuild. What's missing is a named alternative (e.g. get_handicap or project_handicap) for when the user just wants a number, so the routing guidance is clear but not complete.

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

All Morris Golf 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