VenuVidya — Carnatic Flute Study Guide

log_practice_session

Log a practice session against a class item in YOUR journal.

Args:
    class_id: Parent class id.
    item_id: Item id inside the class (kriti/varna/etc.).
    practiced_on: Date in YYYY-MM-DD.
    mcp_token: Your personal VenuVidya token — GET /api/auth/mcp-token.
        Only ever writes into a class this account owns.
    duration_min: Duration in minutes.
    notes: Free-text notes.
    rating: Self-rating 1-5.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`notes`	No
`rating`	No
`item_id`	Yes
`class_id`	Yes
`mcp_token`	Yes
`duration_min`	No
`practiced_on`	Yes

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It mentions the required mcp_token and the ownership restriction, which are useful behavioral traits. However, it does not disclose return values, error handling, idempotency, or potential side effects beyond the write itself.

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 concise: a one-sentence purpose followed by a bullet list of args with brief explanations. It front-loads the core action and avoids redundancy, making it easy to scan.

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?

Given the lack of an output schema, the description should clarify what the tool returns or possible errors. It covers parameter semantics and ownership constraints but omits return/error behavior, leaving some uncertainty for an agent.

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?

The description individually explains every parameter with meaning beyond the schema, including date format (YYYY-MM-DD), item type (kriti/varna/etc.), token acquisition endpoint, and the ownership constraint. This fully compensates for the 0% schema coverage.

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 states a specific verb ('Log') and resource ('a practice session against a class item') with scope ('in YOUR journal'), clearly distinguishing from read/query siblings like get_class and list_classes. It also implies a write operation, which aligns with the tool's function.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description does not provide explicit when-to-use guidance, exclusions, or alternatives. It only states the purpose and a constraint (writes only into owned classes), leaving the agent to infer when to invoke this tool versus siblings.

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

All VenuVidya — Carnatic Flute Study Guide tools Inspect

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

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: ask_venuvidya is a RAG chatbot, search_syllabus is keyword search, list/get_lesson and list/get_class handle distinct resources, and log_practice_session writes practice data. No two tools have overlapping responsibilities.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (ask, get, list, log, search). Even 'ask_venuvidya' uses a verb + proper noun, matching the style. Naming is predictable and scannable.

Tool Count5/5

Seven tools cover the core flows of a study guide: browsing lessons, searching content, logging practice, and retrieving class journals. This is well-scoped—not too sparse, not bloated.

Completeness4/5

The surface covers viewing lessons and classes, searching, and logging practice, but lacks write operations for lessons or classes (e.g., annotating or updating). However, the server's role is a study guide, and the missing operations are not essential for its stated purpose.

Resources

Need Help?