Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MCP Reminders

MCP Reminders

by MikeyBeez
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript

remind_me

Set reminders with priority levels to help Claude remember tasks across sessions, functioning like an AI assistant's personal note system.

Instructions

Add a reminder

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": {
      "reminder": "<reminder>"
    },
    "name": "remind_me"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
reminderYesWhat to remember
priorityNoPriority level (default: normal)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Add a reminder' implies a write operation but doesn't specify whether this requires authentication, what happens on success/failure, or if there are rate limits. This is inadequate for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 a single, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple tool and front-loads the core purpose immediately.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a write operation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, error conditions, or behavioral nuances. The high schema coverage helps with parameters, but overall context is lacking.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents both parameters ('reminder' and 'priority'). The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema, meeting the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 'Add a reminder' clearly states the verb ('Add') and resource ('reminder'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from sibling tools like 'complete_reminder' or 'delete_reminder', which prevents a score of 5.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'check_reminders' or 'delete_reminder'. There's no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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