Skip to main content
Glama
kristianedlund

hardcover-mcp

by kristianedlund
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

set_reading_goal

DestructiveIdempotent

Create, update, or archive a reading goal. Without id: goal, metric, start_date, and end_date are required; if an active goal with the same metric and dates exists it is updated (only the fields you pass change), otherwise a new goal is…

Instructions

Create, update, or archive a reading goal. Without id: goal, metric, start_date, and end_date are required; if an active goal with the same metric and dates exists it is updated (only the fields you pass change), otherwise a new goal is created. With id (from get_reading_goal): edit that goal, changing only the fields you pass; archived=true hides it from get_reading_goal and archived=false brings it back. Returns the goal with id, target, progress, state, and archived. To remove a goal for good use delete_reading_goal.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoGoal ID to edit (from get_reading_goal). Omit to create.
goalNoTarget count to reach by end_date.
metricNoGoal metric: 'book' or 'page'.
privacyNoWho can see it: 'public', 'followers', or 'private' (or 1, 2, 3).
archivedNoWith id: true archives the goal, false restores it.
end_dateNoEnd date (ISO 8601, e.g. '2026-12-31').
start_dateNoStart date (ISO 8601, e.g. '2026-01-01').
descriptionNoOptional goal description.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.0.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / privacy
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Who can see it: 'public', 'followers', or 'private' (or 1, 2, 3).",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / privacy_setting_id
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Optional privacy setting ID.",
-  "type": "integer"
-}
  2. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.9.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / archived
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "With id: true archives the goal, false restores it.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / id
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Goal ID to edit (from get_reading_goal). Omit to create.",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • removedInput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "goal",
-  "metric",
-  "start_date",
-  "end_date"
-]
  3. First observedv0.4.0

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds substantial behavior beyond annotations: it explains the upsert rule for matching metric and dates, that only passed fields change, that archive hides from get_reading_goal and is reversible, that permanent deletion is handled elsewhere, and what fields the response contains. This is far richer than the destructive/idempotent hints alone.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, then proceeds through create-vs-edit branches, archive behavior, return shape, and the permanent-deletion alternative. Every sentence carries operational information and there is no filler.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers creation, editing, archiving, restoration, conditional required fields, return fields, and the correct sibling for permanent deletion. It is complete enough for an agent to choose and invoke the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Although the schema already documents each parameter at 100% coverage, the description adds conditional semantics the schema does not capture: goal, metric, start_date, and end_date are required when creating without an id, and with an id only passed fields are changed. The archived parameter behavior is also contextualized relative to get_reading_goal.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource combination — 'Create, update, or archive a reading goal' — and explicitly distinguishes the operation from get_reading_goal and delete_reading_goal. An agent can immediately tell this is the write/upsert/archive tool for reading goals.

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?

It gives explicit branching guidance: without an id, create or update based on matching metric and dates; with an id from get_reading_goal, edit that goal. It also names the alternative for permanent deletion — delete_reading_goal — and clarifies that archived=false restores rather than deletes.

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