Skip to main content
Glama

cronos_aggiungi_entry

Add a new entry to the work diary with project name, description, and intro paragraph. Optionally include content, requester, repository details, Jira ticket, GitLab merge request, and date.

Instructions

Aggiunge una nuova entry al diario di lavoro.

Se il file non esiste, lo crea con la struttura corretta. Il titolo del file segue il formato "Per lo Stand-up {Giorno+1} {Mese} {Anno}".

Parametri:

  • progetto (str, required): Nome del progetto (es. "SmarTicket", "MCP Teseo")

  • descrizione (str, required): Breve descrizione del lavoro (es. "Fix bug autenticazione")

  • paragrafo_intro (str, required): Paragrafo introduttivo che riassume cosa e' stato fatto

  • contenuto (str, optional): Contenuto aggiuntivo (sottosezioni, bullet points, codice)

  • richiesto_da (str, optional): Nome della persona che ha richiesto il lavoro

  • repository (str, optional): Nome del repository

  • branch (str, optional): Nome del branch

  • jira_ticket (str, optional): Codice ticket Jira (es. "SMART-123")

  • jira_url (str, optional): URL del ticket Jira

  • gitlab_mr (str, optional): Numero MR GitLab (es. "!456")

  • gitlab_mr_url (str, optional): URL della MR GitLab

  • data (str, optional): Data del file YYYY-MM-DD (default: oggi)

Restituisce: Conferma dell'operazione con path del file e dettagli.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
progettoYesNome del progetto
descrizioneYesBreve descrizione del lavoro
paragrafo_introYesParagrafo introduttivo
contenutoNoContenuto aggiuntivo (opzionale)
richiesto_daNoNome di chi ha richiesto il lavoro (opzionale)
repositoryNoNome del repository (opzionale)
branchNoNome del branch (opzionale)
jira_ticketNoCodice ticket Jira (opzionale)
jira_urlNoURL del ticket Jira (opzionale)
gitlab_mrNoNumero MR GitLab (opzionale)
gitlab_mr_urlNoURL della MR GitLab (opzionale)
dataNoData YYYY-MM-DD (opzionale, default oggi)
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description discloses file creation behavior and naming format, but lacks details on side effects (e.g., appending vs overwriting), permissions, or concurrency. Provides average transparency for a write operation.

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?

Well-structured with a clear purpose statement, file behavior details, and a parameter list. Slightly verbose due to parameter repetition, but each section earns its place. Concise enough for quick understanding.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given 12 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers file creation, naming, return value, and parameter defaults. Misses details on concurrency and error handling, but overall sufficient for a complex tool.

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 coverage is 100%, but the description adds value with concrete examples (e.g., 'SmarTicket' for progetto) and clarifies defaults (e.g., data defaults to today). Enhances usability beyond schema definitions.

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 clearly states the tool adds a new entry to a work diary, specifying the resource and action. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'cronos_aggiungi_a_progetto', but the purpose is unambiguous.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives; does not mention context or prerequisites. The description only explains functionality without usage recommendations.

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/mauriziomocci/mcp-cronos'

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