Skip to main content
Glama

Dandori

Cocher une routine

dandori_toggle_routine

Marquer une routine comme faite, ou la décocher si elle l'était déjà, pour un jour donné (aujourd'hui par défaut). En mode étapes, toutes les étapes suivent, ou une seule avec step_id ; une étape qui demande une valeur (requires_value) ne se coche qu'avec elle (values, ou value avec step_id) : demande-la à l'utilisateur, ne l'invente jamais

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "dandori_toggle_routine"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesID de la routine
dateNoJour à cocher (YYYY-MM-DD), passé ou aujourd'hui, pas avant le départ de la routine ; par défaut aujourd'hui
valueNoAvec step_id : la valeur de l'étape, si elle en demande une
valuesNoValeurs des étapes qui en demandent une, par ID d'étape : { "12": 72.4 }. Sans elles, l'API refuse et liste les étapes à remplir (value_steps)
step_idNoCocher ou décocher cette seule étape (ID dans dandori_list_routines)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description adds meaningful behavior beyond the annotations: toggling done/undone, default date behavior, step propagation, single-step selection, and the requirement to ask the user for step values. These details complement the annotations, which already state mutation and non-idempotent behavior, without contradicting them.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core action and then adds conditional behavior in a compact way. It is dense but every clause carries relevant operational meaning, with little wasted wording.

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?

Given the tool's complexity, the annotations, and the rich schema, the description covers the essential behavioral rules: toggle semantics, date scoping, step handling, and value-gathering. It does not spell out return behavior, but no output schema exists and the main invocation rules are adequately covered.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds useful interaction semantics: step_id targets one step, otherwise all steps follow, and values/value are required only when a step demands a value. This goes beyond the individual parameter descriptions by explaining how parameters combine.

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 names a specific verb and resource: marking a routine done or toggling it back, for a given day. It is clear what the tool does, although it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling routine-editing tools such as dandori_save_routine.

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?

It explains the main usage context: toggling a routine for a day, defaulting to today, with step-mode behavior and single-step toggling via step_id. It also instructs the agent to ask the user for required values rather than inventing them, though it does not name alternative tools or exclusion cases.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources