NitroStack Calculator MCP Server

prioritizeNotifications

Categorize notifications into Urgent, Normal, or FYI tiers based on your active project, upcoming meetings, and key collaborators.

Instructions

Prioritize a list of notifications into Urgent, Normal, and FYI tiers based on the user's current work context.

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": {
      "notifications": "<notifications>",
      "context": "<context>"
    },
    "name": "prioritizeNotifications"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`context`	Yes	The user's current work context.
`notifications`	Yes	The list of notifications to prioritize across all sources.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 3, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the core behavior (grouping into tiers) but does not explain the prioritization criteria, whether the input is mutated, or the exact representation of the output. This is informative but lacks key behavioral details.

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 a single concise sentence that is front-loaded with the verb 'Prioritize' and contains no unnecessary words. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's function.

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?

The tool has complex nested inputs and no output schema. The description states the tier names but does not explain the output structure (e.g., grouped list or added property) or how the context influences prioritization. This leaves some ambiguity for a tool of this complexity.

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?

Both parameters have schema descriptions providing 100% coverage. The description adds no additional meaning about parameter semantics; it merely names the list and context. With high schema coverage, baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses the specific verb 'Prioritize' and clearly identifies the input (a list of notifications) and output (Urgent, Normal, FYI tiers) based on the user's work context. This distinguishes it effectively from sibling fetch and context-building tools.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description implies the tool is used after collecting notifications and building a user context, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or mention any exclusions. The intended usage is clear from the parameters, but no explicit guidance is provided.

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

Deploy Server