Skip to main content
Glama

Send the brief of today now

well_send_brief_now

Send the person their brief of today now, the same brief their scheduled routine sends.

Call it when the person asks for the point or for the brief of the day now: "fais-moi le point", "on fait le point ?", "fais-moi mon brief du matin", "give me my morning brief", "catch me up on today", "send me my brief now". It takes no argument and acts only on the caller's own brief routine.

Do not call it for a question about one invoice or one client, such as "fais-moi le point sur la facture 42": that is a read about one item, not the brief.

Reply in one line per status: the brief is on its way, a brief is already on its way, or every brief routine is off. In that case say a brief turns back on with well_update_schedule, status "active", on its routine. When the call fails, say the brief could not be started and to try again later; never say a brief is on its way and never say the briefs are off.

When the token authorizes one workspace, call this directly — no workspace call is needed first. When it authorizes several, this read will not guess which one you mean: pass workspace_id on the call.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
workspace_idNoTarget workspace. Omit when the token authorizes one workspace. Required when it authorizes several — a write lands in exactly one workspace and this call would not say which.
conversation_idNoThe conversation id returned by the previous Well result, in its meta under well/conversation_id, in its structuredContent, or in its JSON text block. Pass it back on every call in the same conversation, including a call a card makes, so the chosen workspace and the earlier answers still apply. It decides the conversation on its own: nothing the host states about the session replaces it. Omit it only on the first call of a conversation.
idempotency_keyNoOptional client-supplied key. A retried write with the same key returns the original result instead of re-applying the operation.
workspace_scopeNoRestrict this call to the family: the token's primary workspace plus the company workspaces under it that you are a member of. Unrelated authorized workspaces drop out of the read; row reads merge across the family, while a per-workspace figure still reports exactly one workspace.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
errorNo
statusNo`started`: the brief is on its way. `already_running`: a brief of this routine is still in flight. `brief_off`: every brief routine of the person is off.
successYesTrue when the call ran, whether the brief started or not.
variantNoThe brief that runs: morning, afternoon or end of day. Null when every brief routine is off.
conversation_idNoThe conversation this result belongs to. Pass it back as the conversation_id argument on every later Well call in the same conversation.
newly_connectedNoTools that connected to this workspace since the last result and that no session was told about yet, oldest first. Present only when at least one tool is new. The connected-line rule says when to tell an entry; when it does, one line per entry, in the person's language: "<name> is connected.". Never fold several entries into one sentence. Each entry comes back once, on one result only: never repeat its line later.
conversation_id_noteNoPresent only when the server opened a fresh lane, stating that no choice recorded earlier was read.
conversation_id_sourceNoWhere the conversation id came from: the host's own request meta, the caller's argument, or a fresh lane the server opened.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare it is a non-destructive, non-idempotent write; the description goes well beyond that: it discloses that it acts only on the caller's own brief routine, enumerates the three possible status outcomes, and prescribes the exact failure message ('never say a brief is on its way'). It also explains the single-workspace vs multi-workspace authorization behavior. The stray word 'this read' is a wording slip against readOnlyHint=false but the description as a whole clearly describes a send, so it is not a contradiction.

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?

Well front-loaded: purpose first, then trigger/exclusion examples, then reply and failure behavior, then workspace mechanics. The quoted-utterance list and the reply-scripting paragraph are long but each carries operational value; only minor trimming would improve it.

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?

An output schema exists, yet the description still tells the agent how to phrase the three status outcomes, what to say on failure, and how workspace selection works — everything needed to call it and report the result correctly.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description only repeats the workspace_id guidance already spelled out in the schema ('omit when the token authorizes one workspace'). It says nothing about conversation_id, idempotency_key, or workspace_scope, so it adds essentially no meaning beyond the structured fields.

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 opening sentence states a specific verb and resource ('Send the person their brief of today now') and pins the scope by equating it to what their scheduled routine would send. It also explicitly rules out the look-alike case (a question about one invoice or one client), so the agent can separate it from reads like well_get_morning_brief or well_sum_invoices.

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?

Gives concrete trigger utterances in French and English ('fais-moi le point', 'catch me up on today'...) plus an explicit exclusion with a contrasting example ('fais-moi le point sur la facture 42' is a read about one item). It also names the follow-up tool (well_update_schedule with status 'active') for the case where every routine is off.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources