Skip to main content
Glama

AfterLaunch

by io.afterlaunch

propose_move

Put a discussion thread you found onto the founder's growth board as a pending move. WHEN: you have read a thread on a community they work (a subreddit, Hacker News, a forum) that the board does not carry, and can say why it is worth their twenty minutes. It lands at the tail of the board, keyed to the thread so a repeat lands on one row, and comes back with its posture: on Reddit or Hacker News that is draft_only, meaning you draft and the founder posts, and you must never post there yourself. Only community_reply and community_answer. Free; 'act' scope; a fixed number a day. A thread already on the board hands back its existing move id. WHAT COMES BACK: the move id and posture, so you can save a draft with update_draft next.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
whyYesWhy it is worth their time, in one or two sentences.
kindYescommunity_answer for a question thread; otherwise community_reply.
draftNoOptional: your drafted reply.
titleYesThe thread, as the founder would name it.
targetYesThe https address of the thread itself.
sourcesNoOptional: up to five https addresses behind the why.

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description richly discloses behavior beyond the minimal annotations: it lands at the tail of the board, deduplicates by thread so a repeat lands on one row, returns the existing move id for already-added threads, has a fixed daily limit, and clarifies the draft_only posture for Reddit/HN. No contradiction with annotations.

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 dense but well organized with a WHEN section and a WHAT COMES BACK section, front-loading the core purpose. Every sentence carries actionable information, including cost, scope, dedupe behavior, and follow-up tool.

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 explicitly tells the agent what comes back (move id and posture) and how to proceed (use update_draft next). It also covers side effects, idempotency, constraints, and rate limiting, making it complete for safe invocation.

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 meaningful operational semantics: it explains what 'why' should contain, that 'target' is the thread URL, and that a repeat target returns an existing move id. It doesn't systematically walk each parameter, but it goes beyond the schema's static 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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: putting a found discussion thread onto the founder's growth board as a pending move. It clearly distinguishes itself from related siblings like ship_move, skip_move, and undo_move by describing the proposal/pending state.

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?

It explicitly states the triggering condition: when you have read a thread on a community the board does not carry and can justify why it is worth the founder's time. It also gives a when-not/constraint: you must never post there yourself, and only community_reply/community_answer postures apply.

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

All AfterLaunch 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

A4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, and descriptions are thorough. A few pairs (e.g., ship_move vs set_output_status, dismiss_gap vs skip_move) overlap on the dismissal concept but operate on different surfaces, so an agent can usually tell them apart with careful reading.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow the same snake_case verb_noun pattern (e.g., get_move, create_checkout, untrack_prompt). Retrieval tools consistently use get_ for single items and list_ for collections, and action verbs are precise, so the naming is fully predictable.

Tool Count2/5

42 tools is heavy by any standard, exceeding the 25+ threshold in the calibration. While each tool may earn its place given the breadth of the domain, the sheer number will overwhelm an agent and complicate tool selection.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers the main lifecycles well: moves (list/get/ship/skip/archive/undo/update), outputs (list/get/ship/redraft), connections (list/start/poll/disconnect), prompts (track/untrack/list), and scans (refresh/get/set intensity). Minor gaps exist, such as no direct edit for KB pages, but record_insight partially fills that.

Resources