Skip to main content
Glama

checkin_habits

Create or update habit check-ins to mark habits as done for a day, supporting numeric values, goals, and backfilling past dates. Handles single or batch operations.

Instructions

Create or update a habit check-in (mark a habit as done for a given day).

Supports both single check-in and batch. For a single check-in, pass a dictionary directly. For multiple, pass a list of dictionaries.

Important notes on the fields:

  • date defaults to today when omitted. Internally converted to the API's YYYYMMDD stamp.

  • value defaults to 1.0. For boolean habits (e.g. "did I run today") keep 1.0; for numeric habits (e.g. "read 30 minutes") set the actual number achieved.

  • goal defaults to 1.0. Compare value vs goal to know whether the habit was met.

  • To backfill a missed day, pass the past date explicitly.

Args: checkins: Check-in dictionary or list of dictionaries. Each item must contain: - habit_id (required): ID of the habit to check in - date (optional): Day to check in, YYYY-MM-DD format. Defaults to today. - value (optional): Check-in value, default 1.0 - goal (optional): Check-in goal, default 1.0 - status (optional): Check-in status

Examples: # Check in today for a boolean habit {"habit_id": "habit-1"}

# Numeric habit: read 45 minutes against a 30 minute goal
{"habit_id": "habit-1", "value": 45, "goal": 30}

# Backfill yesterday
{"habit_id": "habit-1", "date": "2026-07-03"}

# Batch
[
    {"habit_id": "habit-1"},
    {"habit_id": "habit-2", "value": 45, "goal": 30}
]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
checkinsYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations to lean on, the description carries the full burden and discloses defaults ('date defaults to today'), internal conversion ('converted to the API's YYYYMMDD stamp'), and value/goal semantics. It doesn't discuss auth or side effects, but for a create/update tool the behavioral details provided are substantial.

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 well-structured with a clear summary, field notes, and labeled examples. It is somewhat long, but every sentence adds necessary detail given the flexible schema. The front-loaded purpose sentence makes it easy to grasp immediately.

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 tool's complexity lies in its open-structured checkins parameter, and the description fully covers that complexity: field semantics, defaults, formats, batch usage, and examples. An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. The description is complete for an agent to invoke 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?

The schema has 0% description coverage and an open 'additionalProperties' structure, so the description must compensate. It does so thoroughly by defining each field (habit_id required, date optional with format, value default 1.0, goal default 1.0, status optional) and providing concrete examples for boolean, numeric, backfill, and batch cases.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Create or update a habit check-in (mark a habit as done for a given day).' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_habit_checkins (reading) and create_habits/update_habits (managing habits themselves).

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 description provides rich usage context: it explains single vs batch usage, defaults, boolean vs numeric habit examples, and backfilling with a past date. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, but the context is clear enough for an agent to apply it correctly.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Code-MonkeyZhang/ticktick-mcp-enhanced'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server