Skip to main content
Glama

get_planning_conflicts

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch paginated planning conflicts to identify scheduling clashes and resolve resource allocation issues.

Instructions

Get all conflicts

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cursorNoCursor for fetching the next page of results
per_pageNoNumber of results per page (default: 25)

Implementation Reference

  • The async handler function that executes the get_planning_conflicts tool logic. Calls the Eduframe API at /planning/conflicts with optional cursor and per_page parameters, formats the response, and returns paginated results.
    async ({ cursor, per_page }) => {
      try {
        const result = await apiList<EduframeRecord>("/planning/conflicts", { cursor, per_page });
        void logResponse("get_planning_conflicts", { cursor, per_page }, result);
        const toolResult = formatList(result.records, "planning conflicts");
        if (result.nextCursor) {
          toolResult.content.push({ type: "text", text: `\nNext page cursor: ${result.nextCursor}` });
        }
        return toolResult;
      } catch (error) {
        return formatError(error);
      }
    },
  • Input schema for get_planning_conflicts tool. Accepts optional 'cursor' (string) and 'per_page' (positive integer) parameters using Zod validation.
    inputSchema: {
      cursor: z.string().optional().describe("Cursor for fetching the next page of results"),
      per_page: z.number().int().positive().optional().describe("Number of results per page (default: 25)"),
    },
  • Registration of the get_planning_conflicts tool with the MCP server via server.registerTool(). Includes description, readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotentHint annotations.
    export function registerPlanningConflictTools(server: McpServer): void {
      server.registerTool(
        "get_planning_conflicts",
        {
          description: "Get all conflicts",
          annotations: { readOnlyHint: true, destructiveHint: false, idempotentHint: true },
          inputSchema: {
            cursor: z.string().optional().describe("Cursor for fetching the next page of results"),
            per_page: z.number().int().positive().optional().describe("Number of results per page (default: 25)"),
          },
        },
        async ({ cursor, per_page }) => {
          try {
            const result = await apiList<EduframeRecord>("/planning/conflicts", { cursor, per_page });
            void logResponse("get_planning_conflicts", { cursor, per_page }, result);
            const toolResult = formatList(result.records, "planning conflicts");
            if (result.nextCursor) {
              toolResult.content.push({ type: "text", text: `\nNext page cursor: ${result.nextCursor}` });
            }
            return toolResult;
          } catch (error) {
            return formatError(error);
          }
        },
      );
  • Import of registerPlanningConflictTools in the main tools index file that aggregates all tool registrations.
    import { registerPlanningConflictTools } from "./planning_conflicts";
  • Registration call for planning conflict tools in the array of all tool registrations, invoked in registerAllTools.
    registerPlanningConflictTools,
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds no extra behavioral information beyond the name. It does not mention pagination behavior, conflict types, or any other traits. With good annotation coverage, the description's contribution is minimal but not contradictory.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence, which is concise. However, it lacks structure and does not provide additional useful information. It is front-loaded but does not earn its place by offering value beyond the tool name. A score of 3 indicates acceptable but not optimal conciseness.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the complexity (2 parameters, no output schema, no nested objects), the description is incomplete. It does not explain what conflicts are, what the response looks like, or any filtering criteria besides pagination. With no output schema, the description should at least hint at the return format. The description is too sparse to be fully useful.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters (cursor and per_page). The description 'Get all conflicts' does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. According to the rules, when schema coverage is high, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description 'Get all conflicts' clearly states the action (get) and resource (conflicts). However, it does not specify that it retrieves planning conflicts, which is implied by the tool name. It is distinct from sibling getters in the server, but lacks specificity about the scope of conflicts.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not differentiate it from other getters or mention scenarios where it is appropriate or not. Sibling tools include many getters but none specifically for conflicts, but the description offers no context.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/martijnpieters/eduframe-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server