Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
skepsis

skepsis

by ionpetro
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

Show progress

progress
Read-only

Retrieve XP, streaks, learned words, due reviews, accuracy, badges, and the next lesson to track Greek-root tutoring performance and decide what to review next.

Instructions

XP, streak, streak freezes, words learned, items due for review, accuracy, badges, and the next lesson.

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": "progress"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

readOnlyHint=true already declares the safety profile, so the description needn't restate it. Its field enumeration effectively doubles as a return-value sketch since there is no output schema, which adds real value, but it says nothing about format, freshness, or whether data is per-user/per-course.

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?

A single tight sentence fragment with zero filler, and the most salient metrics (XP, streak, due items) lead the list. It loses a point for being a bare noun list with no stating verb or framing clause.

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?

For a zero-param read with no output schema, the description supplies the closest thing to a return spec, which is a meaningful contribution. However, it gives no sense of structure, units, or what 'next lesson' and 'accuracy' concretely contain, leaving an agent guessing at the response shape.

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, so the baseline is 4; there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. The enumerated fields at least confirm the tool is unfiltered and returns a fixed dashboard of metrics.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description is a list of data fields (XP, streak, badges, etc.) rather than a verb+resource statement; the actual purpose — returning the user's learning progress snapshot — must be inferred. It does add concrete specificity beyond the title 'Show progress', but an agent has to read the enumeration to conclude what the tool is for.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No when-to-use guidance and no distinction from siblings such as review, list_course, or start_lesson. The list of returned fields implies 'check the learner's stats' but nothing states the triggering condition or alternatives.

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