Skip to main content
Glama

DC Member API

by io.github.dynamitecircle

rooms_summaries

GET /rooms/:roomID/summaries/:type — List past daily or weekly summaries

List past summaries of a given type for a room, newest first. Cursor-paginated — pass cursor from the previous response to fetch the next (older) page.

Each summary covers a non-overlapping window (one per day for daily, one per week for weekly). Use this for catch-up workflows ("show me the last 7 daily summaries before I rejoin the conversation"). Same access gate as GET /rooms/:roomID.

See also: Summaries cover broad activity per window. For specific content (did anyone mention X?), POST /search/messages with q= and roomID= is faster than reading multiple summaries.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeYesSummary type — `daily` or `weekly`.
limitNoMax results (1-50)
cursorNoCursor from a previous response's `nextCursor`. Pass to fetch the next (older) page.
roomIDYesRoom ID

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It discloses cursor-paginated behavior, non-overlapping windows, and implies read-only operation. Lacks explicit idempotency statement but is sufficient for a read operation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Well-structured with front-loaded HTTP path and summary. Subsequent paragraphs explain pagination and use cases. Every sentence adds unique information; no redundancy or fluff.

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?

No output schema, but description doesn't specify the structure of each summary object. Mentions 'nextCursor' but not other response fields. Adequate for a list tool but leaves some ambiguity about returned data.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, providing baseline. Description adds value by explaining cursor usage ('pass cursor from previous response's nextCursor'), default limit, and valid types ('daily' or 'weekly'), going beyond schema.

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 clearly states the tool lists past daily or weekly summaries for a room, using a specific HTTP path. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'rooms_summary' (singular) by implying it returns multiple summaries, and explicitly mentions an alternative tool for specific content search.

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?

Provides explicit use cases: 'Use this for catch-up workflows'. Offers clear alternative guidance: 'POST /search/messages ... is faster than reading multiple summaries' for specific content queries. Also mentions access gate consistency.

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

All DC Member API 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

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Despite the large number of tools, each has a detailed description that clearly distinguishes its purpose. Minor potential overlaps (e.g., search vs. resource-specific search, own vs. other's agenda) are well documented, so an agent can differentiate them.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names follow a consistent verb_noun or resource_subresource_action pattern in snake_case. A few tools are just nouns (e.g., 'alerts', 'announcements'), but these are top-level listing endpoints; overall the naming is predictable.

Tool Count2/5

85 tools is very high for a single server, making it difficult for an agent to efficiently explore and select the right tool. While each tool seems justified for the broad domain, the count feels overwhelming and could be streamlined.

Completeness3/5

The tool surface covers most major areas (events, trips, chapters, rooms, search, profile, etc.) with CRUD or lifecycle operations. However, the lack of a 'send message' tool for rooms is a notable gap, and some resources (e.g., events) are read-only on creation/update, limiting agent workflows.

Resources