Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
adhd-mcp

adhd-mcp

by JerryFish123
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

qa_session_start

Start a Q&A session by creating a dated session file for each task.

Instructions

Create adhd/sessions/YYYY-MM-DD-slug.md when starting Q&A for a task.

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": {
      "task_summary": "<task_summary>"
    },
    "name": "qa_session_start"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugNo
workspaceNoProject root; default cwd
task_summaryYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.3

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only mentions creating a file; it does not disclose what happens if the file already exists, whether workspace/directory is created, or any return/error handling behavior. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a major gap.

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?

Single sentence with an embedded target file path and condition; no filler or redundancy.

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?

The tool is simple and the description is adequate for creating a file, but the lack of an output schema, annotations, and a note about the behavior of the parser/existing files makes the context less exhaustive.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Input schema coverage is only ~33% (1 of 3 properties has a description). The description adds no real meaning for 'slug' or 'task_summary' beyond the schema; renaming the default text would help.

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?

Description clearly states it creates a task-specific markdown session file (adhd/sessions/YYYY-MM-DD-slug.md) and ties it to starting Q&A for a task. This is distinct from sibling append/readiness/footer tools, though no alternatives are explicitly named.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Description gives a when-to-use context ('when starting Q&A for a task') but does not explicitly state when not to use it or what sibling tools (e.g., qa_session_append) should be used instead.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools