Skip to main content
Glama

effectiveness

Measure how often your pattern suggestions are confirmed by later observations, revealing which patterns are genuinely useful guidance versus noise.

Instructions

Measure how often suggested patterns were reinforced by a later observe().

    Each suggest() call logs the patterns it returned; each observe()
    confirms the most recent unconfirmed suggestion for that pattern.
    A high confirmation rate means the pattern is genuinely useful
    guidance; a low rate means it is noise worth pruning via
    alias_pattern() merges or gc() decay. Read-only.

    For a raw observation-velocity view use trending(days). For
    promotion/level distribution use stats().

    Args:
        days: Look-back window in days. Default 30. Shorter (7)
            surfaces recent drift; longer (90) measures long-term
            value.

    Returns:
        {"patterns": [<row>, ...],
         "summary": {"total_suggested": int, "total_confirmed": int,
                     "overall_rate": float, "period_days": int}}

        Each <row>: {"pattern": str, "suggested": int,
        "confirmed": int, "rate": float in [0.0, 1.0] rounded to
        3 decimals}. Rows ordered by confirmed desc, then suggested
        desc. "overall_rate" is total_confirmed / total_suggested
        (0.0 when no suggestions in window). Empty "patterns" list
        means no suggest() calls happened in the window — not an
        error.
    

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
daysNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses read-only nature, explains the underlying process of suggest/observe, the confirmation rate logic, and clarifies that an empty patterns list is not an error. This fully compensates for the lack of annotations.

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 well-structured: a concise one-line summary, followed by mechanism, sibling differentiation, parameter details, and return format. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

For a tool with one parameter and no annotations, the description covers purpose, behavior, parameter, return format, and edge cases (empty list). The inclusion of the output schema in text makes it fully complete.

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 single parameter 'days' is described in the Args section with default value (30) and guidance for choosing short (7) or long (90) windows. This compensates for the 0% schema description coverage.

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's purpose: 'Measure how often suggested patterns were reinforced by a later observe().' It explains the mechanism linking suggest() and observe(), and distinguishes itself from siblings like trending() and stats().

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description provides explicit alternatives: 'For a raw observation-velocity view use trending(days). For promotion/level distribution use stats().' It also explains the meaning of high/low confirmation rates, guiding when to use pruning actions.

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/WRG-11/instinct'

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