Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
crunchtools

mcp-metsuke-crunchtools

Official
by crunchtools
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Upsert Definition Tool

upsert_definition_tool

Define or modify report definitions with schedules, agent assignments, and gather prompts to automate data collection and enable agent re-homing.

Instructions

Create or update a report definition.

The owner_agent field makes the gatherer identity data, not code, so gathering can be re-homed to another agent without a rebuild. The schedule is a live cron expression: Metsuke's built-in scheduler fires the report when it comes due, in the given timezone.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesUnique report name (e.g. "core-platform-status")
scheduleNoCron expression for when to fire (e.g. "0 6 * * 5"); None = manual only
timezoneNoIANA timezone the schedule runs in (default: "UTC")UTC
owner_agentNoWhich agent gathers this report (default: "kagetora")kagetora
gather_promptYesThe instruction the gatherer runs to collect findings
source_configNoWhich sources to sweep, as a JSON object

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.1.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / schedule / description
      Previous value: -"Descriptive cron/time metadata (the actual firing is external)"New value: +"Cron expression for when to fire (e.g. \"0 6 * * 5\"); None = manual only"
    • addedInput schema / properties / timezone
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "UTC",
+  "description": "IANA timezone the schedule runs in (default: \"UTC\")",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does add real behavioral context beyond the schema: owner_agent is data not code (so gathering can be re-homed without a rebuild) and schedule is a live cron that the built-in scheduler acts on. It is silent on the mutation semantics that matter most for an upsert — whether an existing definition is merged or overwritten, and what a name collision does.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Three tight sentences with the action front-loaded and no filler. The owner_agent rationale sentence is longer than strictly necessary but does earn its place by justifying the field's design.

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 return values need no explanation, and the schema fully covers parameters. But for a 6-parameter mutation tool with zero annotations, the description omits the upsert contract: whether omitted optional fields (schedule=None, owner_agent="kagetora", timezone="UTC") reset existing values or are preserved on update.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all six parameters, establishing a baseline of 3. The description adds nuance for owner_agent (re-homing without rebuild) and schedule (live cron, scheduler-driven), but says nothing about name, gather_prompt, or source_config beyond what the schema states.

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?

"Create or update a report definition" gives a specific verb pair and resource, which is unambiguous. However it never distinguishes the definition-level write from the sibling trigger_report_tool (which fires a report) or list_reports_tool, leaving that distinction to be inferred from the name.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied by "Create or update" — the description never states when to reach for this tool versus trigger_report_tool (fire now) or the listing tools. The cron/scheduler sentence explains one field's behavior rather than routing the agent to this tool over an alternative.

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