Phorme Training

Mark a 1:1 client reviewed

coach_client_reviewed

Idempotent

Use this after a Phorme coach has reviewed one of their 1:1 clients, to record today as the review and, if the coach set one, the date of the next check-in. It changes only the coach's own check-in dates for that client.

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": {
      "brain_id": "<brain_id>",
      "client_id": "<client_id>"
    },
    "name": "coach_client_reviewed"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`brain_id`	Yes	The brain id of the coach's own build, for example "cameron".
`client_id`	Yes	The client_id of one of the coach's 1:1 clients, from coach_clients.
`next_check_in`	No	The next check-in, YYYY-MM-DD.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`brain_id`	No
`client_id`	No
`reviewed_on`	No
`next_check_in`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 1, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive. The description adds real value beyond them by disclosing write scope: it 'changes only the coach's own check-in dates for that client', plus that the review date is implicitly today rather than a caller-supplied value.

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?

A single dense but well-ordered sentence: trigger first, then recorded values, then scope constraint. Nothing is wasted, though the sentence is long enough that splitting the scope constraint out would improve scannability.

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 annotations covering safety/idempotency, an output schema, and fully described parameters, the description only needs to convey trigger and mutation scope, which it does. Slightly more on what happens absent next_check_in or on idempotent re-application would complete it.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters, which sets the baseline at 3. The description does add one useful nuance by implying next_check_in is conditional ('if the coach set one'), but supplies no format or identification detail beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'record today as the review' for a 1:1 client after coach review. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like coach_client_brief or coach_client_post, though it doesn't name them explicitly.

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?

'Use this after a Phorme coach has reviewed one of their 1:1 clients' gives a clear triggering condition. No explicit when-not or named alternative is given, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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

All Phorme Training 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.