Skip to main content
Glama

Keelen

by io.github.jamie7893

get_product_goal

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read a project's current product goal (the outcome work is aimed at).

READ THIS BEFORE YOU CALL `set_product_goal`: the setter REPLACES the whole
document rather than appending to it, so writing without reading first
silently discards whatever the user already recorded. To add a line, read
the current text, edit it, and set the full result back.

Returns {project_id, product_goal_md, updated_at}. `product_goal_md` is
None when no goal has been set. Tenant-scoped: a project not in the
caller's workspace 404s.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description reveals crucial behaviors: the setter's destructive replace semantics, the return shape, the None sentinel for no goal set, and the tenant-scoped 404 for inaccessible projects. These details materially affect how an agent plans its calls.

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?

The description is organized into three focused parts: core purpose, critical warning about the setter, and return/error contract. It is compact, front-loaded, and every sentence adds usable information.

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?

The description fully covers the read behavior, the edge case of no goal set, the tenant error, and the dangerous interaction with the sibling setter. Combined with the output schema and annotations, an agent has everything it needs to invoke and interpret this tool correctly.

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

Parameters5/5

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

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description compensates by clarifying the role of project_id: it identies the project being read, and the tenant-scoping note explains a key failure mode for that parameter. For a single-parameter tool this is sufficient to resolve ambiguity.

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 first sentence states a specific verb and resource: 'Read a project's current product goal' with a clarifying parenthetical about the outcome work. It also names the sibling set_product_goal, immediately distinguishing the read operation from the write operation.

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?

The description gives an explicit precondition for using the sibling tool: 'READ THIS BEFORE YOU CALL set_product_goal' explains that the setter replaces the whole document. It then walks through the correct sequence for editing a goal, which tells the agent exactly when to use this read tool as a first step.

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

All Keelen 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

A4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Every tool targets a distinct resource and action duo, even within clusters like request handling or security reviews. The get_ vs run_ pairs are clearly separated, and descriptions explicitly contrast confusing alternatives such as archive_project vs delete_project.

Naming Consistency4/5

The set overwhelmingly follows verb_noun snake_case (submit_request, list_projects, resolve_escalation). The one visible deviation is project_status, which breaks the get_/pattern, and signup is a single-word verb instead of sign_up.

Tool Count2/5

37 tools is well above the 25+ threshold and spans auth, billing, project lifecycle, roadmap, escalations, product documents, and multiple review types. Most tools earn their place, but the surface is too large for one server and would be more coherent split into focused servers.

Completeness4/5

The domain coverage is broad: full project lifecycle, request intake/refinement, roadmap manipulation, escalation handling, product doc read/write, and security/legal review flows. Minor gaps exist, most notably no dedicated task-listing or task-update tool, but agents can work around these via project_status and list_escalations.

Resources