noyacg-mcp

签到记录

noy_signin_status

Read-only

Check whether you have signed in today, view your consecutive-day streak, and review recent check-in records. This read-only tool returns -1 for the streak when today's check-in is missing.

Instructions

查今天是否已签到、连续天数、最近记录。每天 00:00（UTC+8）重置；今天没签时 continuous 返回 -1（不是 0）。只读；要真的签到用 noy_checkin。

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": "noy_signin_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description adds useful non-annotation behavior: daily reset at 00:00 UTC+8 and the non-obvious sentinel value continuous=-1 when the user has not checked in today. This is exactly the kind of edge-case context an agent needs.

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 short and front-loaded: first the returned information, then the reset rule and sentinel value, then the read-only distinction and alternative tool. Every sentence carries operational value.

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 zero-parameter read-only status tool with no output schema, the description is complete enough: it names the key returned concepts, documents the important sentinel case, explains the daily reset, and routes write intent to noy_checkin.

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 no parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameter semantics, and it adds no misleading parameter information.

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 states a specific read operation: check whether the user has signed in today, the consecutive-day count, and recent records. It clearly distinguishes this status tool from the sibling action tool noy_checkin.

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 explicitly says to use this tool for read-only status and to use noy_checkin when the user actually wants to check in. The reset timing and the meaning of continuous=-1 further clarify when and how the result should be interpreted.

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