amazing-marvin-complete-mcp

set_reminder

Create a standalone push notification reminder for a phone, specifying the title and Unix time. Use for one-off alerts that do not need to be linked to a task in the Marvin app.

Instructions

Set a standalone push reminder to the phone. Times on tasks are set in the app, not here. Set a standalone push reminder (type 'M', requires the Marvin mobile app to be logged in). WARNING — data integrity: a task reminder in Marvin consists of TWO writes that only the app keeps in sync — reminder fields on the task document itself (taskTime, reminderTime, reminderOffset, snooze, autoSnooze) AND a server-side entry via /reminder/set. This tool only writes the server-side entry. Setting reminder_id to a task ID therefore does NOT link the reminder to the task in the app's UI, and risks an orphaned/inconsistent server-side entry (only visible through get_reminders). Task-linked reminders are set in the Marvin app; use this tool for standalone reminders only. Facts about time on tasks (live data 2026-09-02): the Time field in the app (taskTime) is a clock time that — with auto-created reminders enabled in the user's settings — automatically becomes a reminder at the same time (reminderTime = the clock time, offset 0); Time and reminder are in practice the same thing there. That this MCP does not set times on tasks is therefore an MCP limitation, never a Marvin limitation.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`title`	Yes	Text shown in the notification (max 200 chars)
`reminder_id`	No	Custom ID; randomized otherwise. Do NOT use a task ID here — see description.
`time_unix_seconds`	Yes	Unix time (seconds) for the reminder

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.3.0Aug 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With all annotations false, the description carries the full burden and delivers extensively: it discloses the two-write data integrity hazard, that this tool only writes the server-side entry, that setting reminder_id to a task ID will not link in the UI, and that it can create orphaned entries. It also adds MCP limitation context about task times, far exceeding a minimal schema description.

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 verbose and repetitive: the standalone-reminder statement appears twice, and the 'Facts about time on tasks' section is tangential to invoking the tool. It is organized with a warning block, but several sentences could be trimmed without losing necessary context.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a tool with a write side effect and serious data-integrity caveats, the description covers prerequisites, exclusions, side effects, and failure modes (orphaned entries). Combined with a complete input schema and an output schema, an agent has everything it needs to call this correctly and avoid misuse.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds critical semantics for reminder_id by explaining the two-write mechanism and why a task ID must not be used. It also clarifies the constraint that task times are not set here, which helps interpret time_unix_seconds. This exceeds the baseline for fully-covered schemas.

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 states the specific action — setting a standalone push reminder — and explicitly contrasts it with task-linked reminders, saying 'Task-linked reminders are set in the Marvin app; use this tool for standalone reminders only.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_task and delete_reminder.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly states when to use the tool (standalone push reminders only) and when not to (task-linked reminders). It also names the prerequisite that the Marvin mobile app must be logged in and warns against using a task ID as reminder_id. This is explicit routing guidance relative to the sibling tools.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.