Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Credit Optimizer v5

Credit Optimizer v5

by rafsilva85
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

get_strategy_for_task

Get the optimal strategy for any task type—qa, code, research, content, data analysis, media, or automation—to reduce credit usage by 30-75% with zero quality loss.

Instructions

Get the optimal strategy for a specific task type.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "task_type": "<task_type>"
    },
    "name": "get_strategy_for_task"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
task_typeYesOne of: qa, code, research, content, data_analysis, media, automation

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv5.0.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / task_type / description
      Added value: +"One of: qa, code, research, content, data_analysis, media, automation"
  2. First observedv5.2.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It only states it 'gets' a strategy, but does not disclose any behavioral traits like whether it is read-only, if there are side effects, or what the output entails. Minimal behavioral context.

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?

Single sentence, concise and front-loaded. No unnecessary words.

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?

Simple tool with one param and output schema, but description does not mention output or any constraints. Lacks context about behavior and return value, despite output schema existing.

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?

Schema has one parameter with description listing allowed values, coverage is 100%. Description adds no additional meaning beyond schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'get' and resource 'strategy' for a specific task type. Input schema defines task_type with allowed values. It is distinct from sibling tools 'analyze_prompt' and 'get_golden_rules'.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied but not explicitly stated. No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions.

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