Skip to main content
Glama
SVerITG

Metis

by SVerITG
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Metis · News Radar — Save Daily Brief

save_daily_brief

Saves a composed daily, weekly, or catch-up brief to the Metis dashboard, filling in source links and recording coverage so future briefs do not repeat the same lead.

Instructions

Save a composed brief so the dashboard widget shows it.

The write-back half of the brief round-trip: Claude Desktop or Claude Code
writes the brief from generate_daily_insight(), then calls this. It stores
the brief exactly as the dashboard's own generator would — the coverage
footer is stripped and recorded (so tomorrow's brief does not repeat
today's lead), and the source links shown under the brief are filled in.

Args:
    content: The finished brief, ending with its <<THREADS: ...>> line. Required.
    sources: Leave empty — the source links are filled in from the news table.
    date: The key generate_daily_insight returned: YYYY-MM-DD, or with a
        -weekly / -catchup suffix. Empty = today's daily brief.
    model: Provenance tag. Empty = desktop-brief / desktop-weekly /
        desktop-catchup, matching the suffix, which is what the dashboard reads.

Returns:
    Confirmation with the key saved and what was recorded.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dateNo
modelNo
contentYes
sourcesNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.5
    • changedInput schema / properties / model / default
      Previous value: -"desktop-brief"New value: +""
  2. Addedv0.1.2

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses that the coverage footer is stripped and recorded so tomorrow's brief won't repeat today's lead, and that source links are auto-filled from the news table. It also says the brief is stored 'exactly as the dashboard's own generator would,' which tells the agent the stored form may differ from the input. It does not mention permissions, whether an existing brief for the same date is overwritten, or failure modes.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose and workflow before the per-argument detail, and every sentence carries information. The Returns block is slightly redundant given a real output schema exists, and the docstring scaffolding adds a little length, but nothing is padded.

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?

For a four-parameter write-back tool with an output schema, this covers purpose, sequencing, side effects on stored data, and every parameter's format and defaults. The remaining gap is write semantics: whether saving the same date twice overwrites, and what errors look like.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it documents all four parameters: content's required format ending in the <<THREADS: ...>> line, sources should be left empty because it is filled in, date as the exact key generate_daily_insight returned including the -weekly/-catchup suffixes and the empty-means-today default, and model as a provenance tag with derived defaults. This is meaning the bare schema does not convey.

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 opening sentence states a specific verb, resource and observable effect ('Save a composed brief so the dashboard widget shows it'). The following paragraph makes clear this is the write-back counterpart to generate_daily_insight, so an agent can separate it from the sibling generators without reading either schema.

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?

It explicitly places the call in a sequence: generate_daily_insight() produces the brief, this tool stores it. That rules out most misuse. What's missing is an explicit exclusion or prerequisite statement (e.g. whether it can be called before generation, or what happens if a brief for that date already exists).

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