Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Little Green Light MCP Server

Little Green Light MCP Server

by WillHeadlee
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Hybrid

create_volunteer_time

Record volunteer hours for a constituent, specifying the hours, date, and optional description.

Instructions

Record volunteer hours nested under a constituent

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": {
      "constituent_id": "<constituent_id>",
      "hours": "<hours>"
    },
    "name": "create_volunteer_time"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
hoursYesHours volunteered
descriptionNo
constituent_idYes
volunteer_dateNoYYYY-MM-DD

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.7.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations indicate a mutation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive behavior. The description adds 'nested under a constituent' which provides context about the data hierarchy, but otherwise does not elaborate on side effects, permissions, or error conditions beyond what annotations convey.

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?

A single, concise sentence (7 words) that is front-loaded with the core action. Every word is essential, with no redundancy or irrelevant information.

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 creation tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description lacks details on return values, validation constraints, or typical error scenarios. It does not sufficiently help an agent understand the tool's full behavior or prerequisites.

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?

Schema description coverage is 50% (hours and volunteer_date have descriptions; constituent_id and description do not). The tool description adds no clarification for undocumented parameters, failing to compensate for the gaps.

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 'Record volunteer hours nested under a constituent' clearly states the action (record) and the resource (volunteer hours) with a hierarchical relationship. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list, get, update, and delete volunteer times.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such prerequisites like constituent existence or validation rules. The description only implies creation without explicit context.

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