Skip to main content
Glama

get_prompts_by_date

Retrieve user prompts from LLM sessions for a specific date to review study history and track learning progress.

Instructions

특정 날짜에 했던 질문들을 조회합니다.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dateYes조회할 날짜 (YYYY-MM-DD 형식)

Implementation Reference

  • The handler for the 'get_prompts_by_date' tool in src/server.ts. It takes a date string, loads prompts using 'loadPrompts', and formats them for the MCP response.
    server.tool(
      "get_prompts_by_date",
      "특정 날짜에 했던 질문들을 조회합니다.",
      {
        date: z.string().describe("조회할 날짜 (YYYY-MM-DD 형식)"),
      },
      async ({ date }) => {
        const prompts = loadPrompts(date);
    
        if (prompts.length === 0) {
          return {
            content: [{ type: "text", text: `${date}에 저장된 질문이 없습니다.` }],
          };
        }
    
        const list = prompts
          .map((p, i) => {
            const time = new Date(p.timestamp).toLocaleTimeString("ko-KR", { hour: "2-digit", minute: "2-digit" });
            const typeEmoji = p.type ? getTypeEmoji(p.type) : "📝";
            return `${i + 1}. [${time}] ${typeEmoji} ${p.prompt}`;
          })
          .join("\n");
    
        return {
          content: [{ type: "text", text: `${date}의 질문 (${prompts.length}개)\n\n${list}` }],
        };
      }
    );
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('조회합니다') but doesn't describe whether this is a read-only operation, what permissions are needed, how results are returned (e.g., format, pagination), or any rate limits. For a tool with no annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool, though it could be slightly more structured (e.g., by explicitly mentioning the parameter). Every part of the sentence contributes to understanding the tool's function.

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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (e.g., list of prompts, error handling), behavioral traits like safety or performance, or how it differs from sibling tools. For a tool with no structured metadata, the description should provide more context to compensate.

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%, with the single parameter 'date' fully documented in the schema as '조회할 날짜 (YYYY-MM-DD 형식)' (date to retrieve in YYYY-MM-DD format). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, such as examples or edge cases, 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 clearly states the verb ('조회합니다' - retrieves/looks up) and resource ('질문들' - questions/prompts) with a specific scope ('특정 날짜에 했던' - done on a specific date). It distinguishes from 'get_recent_prompts' and 'get_today_prompts' by specifying date-based retrieval, though not explicitly contrasting them. The purpose is unambiguous but could more directly differentiate from siblings.

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 like 'get_recent_prompts' or 'get_today_prompts'. The description implies usage for historical date queries but doesn't specify prerequisites, exclusions, or comparative contexts. Without explicit alternatives or constraints, the agent lacks clear decision-making criteria.

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/YUJAEYUN/learnlog-mcp'

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