Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
dsa-coach-mcp

dsa-coach-mcp

by aaryagodbole
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

personalize_schedule

Fit FSRS parameters to your review history so revisions match your personal forgetting rate; requires the optimizer extra.

Instructions

Fit the FSRS parameters to this user's own review history, so revisions are timed to how fast they personally forget. Needs the optimizer extra.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "personalize_schedule"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
reviewsYes
parametersYes
personalisedYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.2.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already establish that this is not read-only and not destructive. The description adds useful context by naming a dependency on the optimizer extra, but it does not explain what existing parameters are replaced or whether sufficient review history is required.

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?

Two short sentences with the purpose front-loaded and the prerequisite second. There is no redundant or filler text.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description need not explain return values, and there are no parameters to document. However, it omits when to call this rather than schedule_info and does not describe the scope of the schedule changes.

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?

This tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. No parameter meaning is needed, and the schema coverage is complete.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: fit FSRS parameters to this user's review history. It also states the outcome, revisions timed to personal forgetting speed, making the purpose clear without relying on the title.

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?

The only guidance is a prerequisite: 'Needs the optimizer extra.' There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or comparison with siblings such as schedule_info or revisions_due.

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