Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
persona-profile-mcp

persona-profile-mcp

by ibeeger
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

修正事实条目

update_fact
Idempotent

Edit an outdated fact in a persona profile, like a job change or relocation, using its factId from get_profile to replace it rather than add a conflicting fact.

Instructions

修改画像中某一条已有事实。信息过时时（换工作、搬城市）应改写原条目，而不是用 add_facts 追加一条互相矛盾的新事实。factId 来自 get_profile。

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": {
      "profileId": "<profileId>",
      "factId": "<factId>"
    },
    "name": "update_fact"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
factIdYes
sourceNo
contentNo
categoryNo
profileIdYes
confidenceNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
factYes
profileYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

注释提供了 idempotentHint=true，描述没有与其矛盾。但描述没有补充注释之外的行为信息——例如修改是覆盖还是合并、是否影响历史记录、是否有权限要求。作为修改类工具（非读取），描述承担了较多的行为披露责任，但未提供额外语境。

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?

描述精炼，两条简短且信息密度高：第一条说明工具功能，第二条提供使用场景和替代工具。没有冗余。虽然未逐参数说明但内容紧凑高效，接近满分。

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?

工具较复杂（6 参数、2 枚举、修改操作），有 output schema 可解释返回结构。描述说明了核心用法（何时改 vs 追加）和 factId 来源，这对主要使用场景是足够的。但未描述修改的成功/失败行为、对相关条目的影响、或枚举参数含义，扣分。若无 output schema 则会更不足。

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?

Schema 覆盖率为 0%，6 个参数中有 2 个 required（profileId、factId）。描述提到了 factId 的来源（"factId 来自 get_profile"），为参数添加了 schema 之外的有用语义。不过其他参数（content、source、category、confidence）未在描述中说明，但考虑到 0 覆盖率，描述做的补偿优于基线水平。

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?

描述明确说明"修改画像中某一条已有事实"，动词+资源明确（update fact）。它通过说明与 add_facts 的区别来区分于兄弟工具，说明此工具用于改写已有条目而不是追加新条目。中文标题"修正事实条目"也清晰表达了用途。

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

给出了明确的用法指导："信息过时时（换工作、搬城市）应改写原条目，而不是用 add_facts 追加一条互相矛盾的新事实"。这明确说明了何时使用此工具、何时不用，并直接命名了替代工具 add_facts。

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