Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
netlogger-mcp

netlogger-mcp

by qso-graph
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Netlogger Past Nets

netlogger_past_nets
Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists recently closed amateur-radio nets and returns the net IDs needed to query their check-ins; filter by name or look back a specified number of days.

Instructions

List closed nets over the last few days, with the net IDs netlogger_past_checkins needs.

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": "netlogger_past_nets"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
name_likeNoOnly nets whose name contains this text (e.g. ARES).
interval_daysNoHow many days back (default 7). Over 7 needs name_like (NetLogger's rule).

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.2.2
    • changedInput schema / properties / interval_days / description
      Previous value: -"How many days back (default 7). Over 7 needs name_like (NetLogger's rule)."New value: +"How many days back (default 7). Over 7 needs name_like\n(NetLogger's rule)."
    • changedInput schema / properties / name_like / description
      Previous value: -"Only nets whose name contains this text (e.g. OMISS)."New value: +"Only nets whose name contains this text (e.g. ARES)."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one genuinely useful behavioral fact beyond that: the result carries net IDs consumed by another tool. It says nothing about ordering, result volume, or what happens when no nets match.

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?

A single sentence with no filler, front-loading the concrete action and closing with the cross-tool dependency. Every clause carries information the agent needs.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value detail is not required, and the parameter set is fully documented. The only soft spot is the vague 'last few days' against a 7-day default, though the schema resolves that.

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 description coverage is 100% and both parameters document their own semantics, including the >7-day rule requiring name_like, so the baseline would be 3. The description does add the 'last few days' framing that motivates interval_days, giving slight lift above baseline.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List closed nets') with an explicit time scope ('over the last few days'), which cleanly separates it from the sibling netlogger_active_nets. It also names the downstream consumer of the returned net IDs, so the agent knows exactly what the tool produces.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description implies the workflow — call this to obtain net IDs before invoking netlogger_past_checkins — which is strong routing guidance. It does not explicitly exclude cases or mention the active-nets alternative by name, so it stops short of a full when/when-not statement.

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