Skip to main content
Glama

run_lever_tick

Recompute daily outbound-optimization scores: refresh message/strategy weights, archive underperforming variants, and update channel affinity and targeting lifts to keep outreach effective.

Instructions

Run the project's daily outbound-optimization tick: recompute the message-variant draw weights pick_message_variant reads (Thompson sampling over graded reward; archives variants whose P(best) stays below the threshold at maturity, never below two active), the discovery-strategy draw weights over the active registry (same Thompson math; archives dominated strategies, never below two active), the per-industry channel affinity get_outbound_targets surfaces, and the measured targeting lifts (industry / size / country / discovery strategy / fresh signal) that re-score the get_outbound_targets ordering. After a sustained flat streak (every arm mature yet none likely best) it rotates out the weakest variant to free a slot for a fresh angle. Idempotent per UTC day — a repeat call returns that day's recorded decision without re-applying. Returns variant weights and archived variants (a stagnation rotation is marked as such), strategy weights and archived strategies, channelAffinity by industry bucket, targeting lifts, the futility vitals verdict (ok / insufficient / futile over recent mature email sends — futile means outreach is statistically drawing no replies and belongs in the cycle report; it clears on its own once recent sends draw replies again), and the live needsReplenishment / needsStrategyReplenishment flags (recomputed each call, not the frozen recorded value).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectIdYesProject name or ID
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for transparency. It discloses idempotency, return values (variant weights, archived variants), and flags (needsReplenishment), but the convoluted phrasing makes these behaviors less transparent than they could be.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, extremely long sentence with repetitive jargon and unclear clause boundaries. It is not concise and would benefit from breaking into structured points, but it does at least follow a logical order of operations and return values.

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?

The description covers core aspects: what the tool does, idempotency, and return values. However, the dense and repetitive language obscures some details, and the lack of an output schema adds burden, making it only moderately complete.

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?

The schema provides a description for projectId ('Project name or ID'), achieving 100% coverage. The tool description does not add further semantic detail beyond reinforcing that it operates on a project, so the baseline of 3 is maintained.

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: 'Run the project's daily outbound-optimization tick' and elaborates on the actions performed. It differentiates from siblings by focusing on the daily optimization routine, though the verbose explanation slightly obscures the core purpose.

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 description mentions idempotency per UTC day, implying it should be run once daily, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No comparative guidance is provided, leaving the agent to infer appropriate usage.

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/aitit-inc/leadace'

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