Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Onplana

by io.github.Onplana
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

compare_baseline

Read-onlyIdempotent

Computed variance of a project against one of its baselines: project finish slip (calendar days), an on-track / at-risk / behind rating, counts of delayed / on-time / ahead / added / removed tasks, and the worst slippers with their start, finish, planned-duration and started-late variance. Duration variance uses the stored planned duration, not the date span. Also returns summary: the comparison in plain English (paragraphs on the finish and the chain of tasks driving it, scope, cost where the caller may read it, tasks added and removed, and a list of the five largest start or finish moves), built without AI, the same text the Baselines tab shows. Use get_baseline for the raw snapshot. On every plan unless baselines are set to Professional; then it needs Professional or above, and below Professional reads continue for 30 days after the change, then are refused.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "baselineId": "<baselineId>"
    },
    "name": "compare_baseline"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
maxTasksNoHow many worst slippers to return (default 10).
baselineIdYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, closed-world, non-destructive behavior, and the description layers on real additional context: the `summary` field is generated without AI, duration variance uses stored planned duration rather than date span, and access is refused after the grace period on lower plans. These are non-obvious operational traits an agent cannot infer from the annotations.

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?

Purpose and scope are front-loaded, and most of the length is justified because there is no output schema to carry the return-value detail. The first sentence is an unusually long run-on that stacks many return fields, which slightly hurts scanability, but no sentence is pure filler.

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 does the necessary work of explaining both the variance payload and the plain-English `summary` contents. Access gating and the planned-duration caveat are covered. The remaining gap is how the project is determined given that only baselineId is accepted, and whether the worst-slipper list is truncated or paginated.

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?

maxTasks is already documented in the schema (default 10) and the description only echoes the 'worst slippers' concept. baselineId has no schema description, and the description implies but never states that it identifies which baseline of the project to compare against, nor how the project itself is resolved. At 50% coverage, the description adds modest meaning but does not close the gap.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource ('Computed variance of a project against one of its baselines') and then enumerates exactly what is returned: finish slip, RAG rating, task-state counts, and worst slippers. It explicitly contrasts itself with get_baseline ('raw snapshot'), so an agent can distinguish the two without opening either schema.

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?

Names the alternative tool and the condition that selects it ('Use get_baseline for the raw snapshot'), which is the primary routing decision. It also discloses a plan-tier prerequisite (needs Professional, with a 30-day grace period after a downgrade). No explicit when-not-to-use beyond that, and the gating sentence is dense enough to require a second read.

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

All Onplana 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