Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
skylight-mcp

skylight-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

skylight_create_chore

Create a chore on a Skylight frame by assigning a title and category. Add it to a family member's list to schedule and track household tasks.

Instructions

Create a chore on a Skylight frame.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "summary": "<summary>",
      "category_id": "<category_id>"
    },
    "name": "skylight_create_chore"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
startNoYYYY-MM-DD start date.
frameIdNo
summaryYesChore title.
category_idYesCategory / family-member id the chore belongs to (required). Get ids from skylight_list_categories.
descriptionNo
reward_pointsNoReward points/stars for completing.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.1
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.7.1
    • removedInput schema / properties / category_id / anyOf
      Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "number"
-  }
-]
    • addedInput schema / properties / category_id / type
      Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "number"
+]
  3. First observedv0.4.6

TDQS

C2.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the write/safe semantics are covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: no auth/permission requirements, no note that the chore is bound to a family-member category, and no indication of idempotency or duplicate handling.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The single sentence is front-loaded and free of waste, so it is structurally sound. However, it is short through under-specification rather than through efficient information density.

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?

Wait — with six parameters, no output schema, and a dense sibling set, the description is not complete enough. It says nothing about frameId targeting, the required category binding, or how to source a category id, leaving the agent wholly dependent on schema descriptions.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is 67% (frameId and description are undocumented), and the description supplies no parameter meaning at all. It does not reinforce the required summary/category_id pair or explain that frameId targets a specific frame; the little value present comes entirely from the schema text.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a clear verb and resource ('Create a chore'), which is more than a tautology, but it gives no scope detail and does not distinguish it from close siblings like skylight_create_recurring_chore or skylight_create_task. An agent must open the schemas to know which creation tool applies.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisite for obtaining a category id, and no mention of how this differs from creating recurring chores or tasks. With ~100 sibling tools, the absence of routing guidance is a real gap.

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