Performance Review

Performance Review Generate

performance_review_generate

Read-onlyIdempotent

Generate a satirical corporate performance review for an employee; takes employee_name, role, rating (rockstar/solid/developing/not_a_culture_fit), actual_performance, and what_manager_wants_to_say — returns review text that communicates nothing clearly.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`role`	No
`rating`	No
`employee_name`	Yes
`actual_performance`	No
`what_manager_wants_to_say`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`role`	No
`rating`	No
`review`	No
`employee`	No
`hr_approved`	No
`rating_translation`	No
`recommended_action`	No
`words_with_meaning`	No
`words_without_meaning`	No
`followup_pip_probability`	No
`what_review_actually_says`	No
`what_manager_wanted_to_say`	No
`will_sarah_chen_be_surprised_at_pip`	No
`will_sarah_chen_know_where_they_stand`	No
`will_marcus_johnson_be_surprised_at_pip`	No
`will_marcus_johnson_know_where_they_stand`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed18 schema fields changedSep 26, 2026
- addedOutput schema / properties / employee
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / followup_pip_probability
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / hr_approved
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / rating
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / rating_translation
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / recommended_action
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / review
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / review_text
```
Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Generated performance review document text",
-  "type": "string"
-}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / role
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / status
```
Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Status of review generation",
-  "type": "string"
-}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / what_manager_wanted_to_say
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / what_review_actually_says
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / will_marcus_johnson_be_surprised_at_pip
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / will_marcus_johnson_know_where_they_stand
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / will_sarah_chen_be_surprised_at_pip
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / will_sarah_chen_know_where_they_stand
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / words_with_meaning
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "number"
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / words_without_meaning
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "number"
+}
```
AddedMay 13, 2026
RemovedApr 23, 2026
First observedApr 22, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile: readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds the output's satirical character ('communicates nothing clearly') but no further behavioral context such as side effects, auth needs, or rate limits, so it only modestly extends what annotations already tell the agent.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence states the action and packs in every parameter name plus the enum values without wasted words. The density is justified because each listed element is needed to invoke the tool correctly.

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 an output schema present and annotations establishing the tool as safe, read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, the description is nearly complete. It covers what the tool does, what it consumes, and the style of the result; no critical operational caveats are missing.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the parameter-meaning burden. It enumerates all five parameters and the full rating enum, which gives an agent the essential mapping between inputs and the satirical output. It stops short of explaining how each field influences the review, but the schema examples provide useful supplementary context.

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?

States a specific operation: 'Generate a satirical corporate performance review,' names the employee/domain, and lists the exact inputs and output style. None of the sibling tools overlap with this function, so it is clearly distinguishable.

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?

The opening phrase makes the intended use case clear: use this whenever a satirical performance review is needed. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the sibling set contains no competing review-generation tool, so no alternative routing is necessary.

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

All Performance Review tools Inspect

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.