Skip to main content
Glama

kernel_panel_record_append

Append a single event to an office panel collection; the system generates the record key automatically.

Instructions

Append one event to a collection of YOUR office's panel (e.g. a state change for the office timeline). The key is generated.

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": {
      "collection": "<collection>",
      "data": "<data>"
    },
    "name": "kernel_panel_record_append"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYes
collectionYesCollection name declared in your office's panels (e.g. events)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.5.1

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It discloses append-only semantics and that a key is generated, but it does not explain permissions, whether the collection must already exist, failure behavior, or what is returned after the append.

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?

The description is two short sentences, front-loads the operation type, and contains no filler. Every phrase contributes either purpose, scope, or the generated-key detail.

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

Completeness2/5

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

There are no annotations and no output schema, and the nested 'data' parameter is only partially specified. The description is too sparse to fully cover prerequisites, payload expectations, and what the generated key means in the response, which matters for a mutation tool.

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 documents the 'collection' parameter and the description adds useful context that it belongs to 'YOUR office's panel'. The 'data' parameter is undocumented in the schema apart from being an arbitrary nested object, and the description only gives an example event type rather than explaining its expected structure.

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 uses a specific verb ('Append') and names the resource ('a collection of YOUR office's panel'), with a concrete example of a state change on a timeline. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling kernel_panel_record_put.

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 example of a state change for the office timeline implies when this tool is appropriate. However, it gives no explicit when-not guidance and does not mention the sibling put tool or other alternatives, leaving the agent to infer the distinction.

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