Skip to main content
Glama

draft_self_improvement_proposal_tool

Draft a skill-improvement proposal from recent reflections by appending self-improvement notes to the agent's skill.md and queuing the result as a draft for later review.

Instructions

Draft a skill-improvement proposal from recent reflexions (Phase 9b).

Reads themed reflexions for ``agent_slug``, appends a 'Self-improvement
notes' section to the agent's current skill.md, and queues the result in
``skill_improvement_proposals`` with status='draft'.

The draft is NOT applied. Use ``apply_proposal(id)`` to write it to disk.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
agent_slugYes
daysNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool reads reflexions, appends notes to skill.md, and queues a draft proposal. This is adequate behavioral transparency, though details on permissions or limits are missing.

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 concise, with three short paragraphs that front-load the main purpose and provide necessary context without unnecessary verbosity. Each sentence adds value.

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 presence of an output schema, the description does not need to explain return values. It covers the main side effects and process, though it could elaborate on the nature of 'themed reflexions' or the skill.md file scope.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage. The description explains agent_slug implicitly but does not mention the 'days' parameter (default 14), which controls the lookback period for recent reflexions. This lack of explanation for a key parameter reduces clarity.

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 clearly states the tool drafts a skill-improvement proposal from recent reflexions, specifying the action and resource. It distinguishes itself from the sibling 'apply_proposal_tool' by explicitly noting the draft is not applied and directing users to that tool for application.

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 clear context for when to use the tool (to draft proposals from recent reflexions) and directs users to apply_proposal for applying the draft. It does not cover all alternative tools but sufficiently differentiates from a key sibling.

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/SVerITG/Metis'

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