Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

AimYear

by io.github.Yahhi
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Set goal

set_goal
DestructiveIdempotent

Save the yearly goal, or replace it with the next one. Rejects with problems[] if the rubric fails. Keeps levers and projects. area is which of the five life areas the goal belongs to.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
whyNo
areaNodefault money
kindNocount (default): a number from baseline to target, e.g. "15 paying customers". done: a one-time result checked yes or no, e.g. "launch v2 in the stores"; no metric, baseline or target, progress is the share of stages done
titleYes
metricNorequired for kind count
targetNorequired for kind count
baselineNovalue today; required for kind count
deadlineYesYYYY-MM-DD in the user's timezone

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / baseline / description
      Previous value: -"value today"New value: +"value today; required for kind count"
    • addedInput schema / properties / kind
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "count (default): a number from baseline to target, e.g. \"15 paying customers\". done: a one-time result checked yes or no, e.g. \"launch v2 in the stores\"; no metric, baseline or target, progress is the share of stages done",
+  "enum": [
+    "count",
+    "done"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / metric / description
      Added value: +"required for kind count"
    • addedInput schema / properties / target / description
      Added value: +"required for kind count"
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "title",
-  "metric",
-  "baseline",
-  "target",
-  "deadline"
-]New value: +[
+  "title",
+  "deadline"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds useful context beyond that: a failed rubric returns problems[], and replacing a goal preserves levers and projects. It does not fully spell out what is overwritten, but the added behavioral detail is meaningful.

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?

Four short sentences, with the core save/replace action front-loaded. Every sentence contributes something, though the area sentence is somewhat redundant with the schema enum.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a destructive, eight-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers purpose, failure behavior, and preservation of levers/projects. It still leaves important context gap, especially the relationship to check_goal_draft and the exact replacement/destruction semantics.

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 75%, so most parameter meaning is already documented. The description only clarifies that area is one of five life areas, which adds little beyond the enum and default already present in the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: save or replace the yearly goal. It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like get_goal or check_goal_draft.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied: use this to save or replace the yearly goal. The description does not state when to prefer check_goal_draft, when not to replace an existing goal, or any prerequisites, so guidance is only inferable.

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

All AimYear 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