Read one settled public Spotlight by date, including labeled house advertisements. Removed or missing days are unavailable.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| day | Yes | Settled auction date in UTC, YYYY-MM-DD. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: it returns labeled house advertisements and that removed or missing days are unavailable, warning the agent about potential empty/error results. 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.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two short sentences, no redundancy, and the core behavior is presented first. The availability limitation is placed second, which is an efficient and logical order.
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 simple read-only single-parameter tool with a full output schema and strong annotations, the description covers all essential aspects: what it reads, how it is scoped, what it includes, and a key failure/availability caveat.
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 coverage is 100%, and the single 'day' parameter is fully described in the schema. The description adds no new parameter-level meaning, but none is necessary given the schema already specifies the format and meaning.
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?
The description states a specific verb ('Read'), a specific resource ('one settled public Spotlight'), and the selection criterion ('by date'). It also clarifies that the result includes labeled house advertisements, which distinguishes the tool from generic listing or current-spotlight siblings.
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?
The phrase 'one settled public Spotlight by date' makes clear this is for reading a historical settled item, not the current spotlight or a list. It does not explicitly name sibling tools as alternatives, but the context strongly implies when it should be used versus get_current_spotlight and list_spotlights.
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.
Each tool has a distinct purpose: retrieving the current spotlight, retrieving a spotlight by date, listing all spotlights, and reading documentation. There is no meaningful overlap or ambiguity between them.
All tool names consistently follow the verb_noun pattern (get_current_spotlight, get_spotlight, list_spotlights, read_agent_docs). Naming style is uniform and predictable.
Four tools is appropriately scoped for a read-only spotlight browsing server. Each tool covers a necessary operation without unnecessary bloat or missing essentials.
The toolset covers the core lifecycle of reading public spotlights: current, by date, and a browsable list, plus documentation. A search or filter capability could be a minor enhancement, but there are no critical gaps for the stated purpose.