Skip to main content
Glama

Dropyour

by io.dropyour

Read, set, or trigger my app's clock

dropyour_schedule

Your app's clock, in one verb. action='read' (default) tells you when it next rings, whether the app is frozen, and the last runs WITH THEIR EFFECT: verdict, duration, and the state version before and after — that is where you see 'it runs but writes nothing', which no error log can show you because there is no error. action='set' schedules one wake-up (5 minutes to 30 days from now); action='cancel' drops it. Your code re-arms itself from its scheduled handler, so setting from here REPLACES what the code armed. action='test' rings NOW and returns the verdict of that run — use it right after writing a scheduled handler instead of waiting for the clock. IT IS A REAL RUN: it counts as an invocation and, if your handler writes, it really writes. Read dropyour_logs with the same call to see what your app said. Tier 4 only — the clock belongs to a graduated app.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
atNoFor action='set': when to ring (ISO datetime), between 5 minutes and 30 days from now.
actionNoread
dropIdYes
managementTokenNo

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations are sparse, so the description carries the burden—and succeeds. It warns that setting replaces the code-armed schedule, that test is a real invocation which can actually write, and that read is where silent no-write runs become visible. No contradiction with the annotations is present.

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 description is long but information-dense; every sentence carries behavioral weight. The ALL CAPS emphasis highlights non-obvious behavior, though a few clauses could be tightened without losing value.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema, the description reasonably covers return semantics for read and test, behavior for set and cancel, and important side effects. The remaining gaps are the undocumented required dropId, managementToken's role, and what set/cancel return on success.

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 description coverage is only 25%, and the description does add real meaning to the action enum and the at time window. However, it never explains dropId or managementToken, leaving two of four parameters semantically undocumented despite the low schema coverage.

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 names a concrete resource ('your app's clock') and a precise set of verbs: read, set, cancel, and test. Each action is explained, and the tool is positioned distinctly from the logging sibling by directing the agent to dropyour_logs as the companion for inspecting app output.

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?

Each action comes with an explicit when-to-use trigger: read for status including silent no-write runs, set for scheduling, cancel for dropping, and test immediately after writing a scheduled handler. It also names dropyour_logs as the alternative for reading app output and restricts use to Tier 4.

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

All Dropyour 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 target clearly distinct resources and actions, and descriptions do a good job separating overlapping areas like call/release/status or read_content/read_app_files. The main risk is momentary confusion between publish/replace/release and the two read-content tools, but careful reading resolves it.

Naming Consistency3/5

All names share the dropyour_ prefix and use snake_case, but the overall pattern is mixed: read_* and list_versions use verb-first naming, while records_list, secret_set, secret_delete, and secrets_list use noun-first naming, and logs/status/whoami are bare nouns. Still readable, but not a consistent verb_noun convention.

Tool Count3/5

23 tools is on the heavy side for a single server and spans several distinct subdomains: drop lifecycle, graduated apps, data, records, secrets, scheduling, and auth. Each tool appears purposeful, but the surface could reasonably be split into focused servers.

Completeness5/5

The set covers the full drop lifecycle — publish, replace, release, rollback, delete, status, settings — plus graduated app concerns like files, logs, versions, store records, app data, secrets, and scheduling. There are no obvious dead ends for the stated domain.

Resources