Skip to main content
Glama

get_today_prompts

Retrieve today's learning prompts and questions to review study progress and track metacognitive development from LLM sessions.

Instructions

오늘 했던 질문들을 조회합니다. 사용자가 '오늘 뭐 공부했지?', '오늘 뭐 물어봤지?' 같은 요청을 할 때 사용합니다.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • Implementation of the 'get_today_prompts' tool. It retrieves prompts for the current date and formats them into a text response for the user.
    server.tool(
      "get_today_prompts",
      "오늘 했던 질문들을 조회합니다. 사용자가 '오늘 뭐 공부했지?', '오늘 뭐 물어봤지?' 같은 요청을 할 때 사용합니다.",
      {},
      async () => {
        const today = getToday();
        const dailyData = loadDailyPrompts(today);
    
        if (dailyData.prompts.length === 0) {
          return {
            content: [{ type: "text", text: "오늘 저장된 질문이 없습니다." }],
          };
        }
    
        const list = dailyData.prompts
          .map((p: PromptEntry, i: number) => {
            const time = new Date(p.timestamp).toLocaleTimeString("ko-KR", { hour: "2-digit", minute: "2-digit" });
            return `${i + 1}. [${time}] ${p.prompt}`;
          })
          .join("\n");
    
        return {
          content: [{ type: "text", text: `📝 오늘의 질문 (${dailyData.prompts.length}개)\n\n${list}` }],
        };
      }
    );
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states this is a query/retrieval operation ('조회합니다'), implying read-only behavior, but doesn't disclose important behavioral traits like whether it requires authentication, returns paginated results, has rate limits, or what format/schema the output follows. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps.

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 perfectly concise with two sentences: one stating the purpose, one providing usage examples. Every word earns its place, and the structure is front-loaded with the core functionality followed by contextual guidance.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description adequately covers purpose and usage. However, for a query tool with sibling alternatives, it could better address differentiation and output expectations. The absence of annotations means the description should ideally provide more behavioral context, but it's minimally complete for basic understanding.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema fully documents the absence of inputs. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters, maintaining focus on the tool's purpose and usage. This meets the baseline expectation for parameterless tools.

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 tool's purpose: '오늘 했던 질문들을 조회합니다' (retrieves today's questions). It specifies the resource (today's questions) and verb (retrieve/query). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_prompts_by_date' or 'get_recent_prompts', which likely have overlapping functionality.

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 usage context with examples: '사용자가 "오늘 뭐 공부했지?", "오늘 뭐 물어봤지?" 같은 요청을 할 때 사용합니다' (use when users ask questions like 'What did I study today?' or 'What did I ask today?'). This gives good guidance on when to invoke the tool, though it doesn't explicitly mention when NOT to use it or alternatives among siblings.

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