Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
kernl

kernl

by fastslack
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

kernel_dashboard_weekly

Generate a weekly planning summary covering completed tasks, open items, upcoming deadlines, and contact activity.

Instructions

Weekly planning summary: tasks completed this week, open items, upcoming deadlines, contact activity.

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": "kernel_dashboard_weekly"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.5.1

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavior burden. It usefully discloses the content categories returned, but says nothing about week boundaries, time zone, data recency, permissions, or whether it is strictly read-only — gaps that matter for a dashboard tool with no output schema.

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?

A single compact sentence with the resource front-loaded and the contents enumerated in a colon list. No filler, no redundancy.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With no output schema and no annotations, the enumerated content areas are the main signal about what comes back, and they are present. Minor gaps remain (period definition, aggregation scope), but the definition is largely sufficient for a zero-parameter read tool.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters and the schema is an empty object, so there is nothing for the description to clarify. Baseline of 4 applies since no parameter semantics are needed.

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?

Specific verb-less but resource-specific statement: a 'weekly planning summary' with four enumerated content areas (completed tasks, open items, deadlines, contact activity). An agent can tell it produces a read-only weekly report, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with the sibling morning/evening dashboards.

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?

The word 'weekly' plus 'planning summary' implies the cadence and context for use, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to kernel_dashboard_morning or kernel_dashboard_evening. Usage must be inferred from the name and cadence modifier.

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