Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Uoink

Uoink

by ryanbiddy
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Pin library shelf

pin_shelf
DestructiveIdempotent

Records an explicit user pin, unpin, or move decision for one item's shelf membership; use it for individual decisions authorized by a dashboard-issued intent token.

Instructions

Record a user's pin, unpin or move decision for one item's shelf membership. Use for an explicit individual decision; use apply_reshelving for run-wide proposed changes. Requires a dashboard-minted user_intent_token tied to the exact operation and current projection revision; no actor string grants authority. The Librarian cannot override the resulting user decision. Retry the same operation_key only with identical arguments.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actionYespin protects this membership; unpin removes its pin; move records a user-directed placement on the target shelf.
reasonNoHuman-readable explanation for the requested action or non-assignment outcome.
shelf_idYesStable target shelf identifier from the library taxonomy or evidence packet.
video_idYesStable saved-item identifier from a search or capture result; not necessarily a YouTube ID.
operation_keyYesClient-generated key for an identical-operation retry; do not reuse it for different arguments.
user_intent_tokenYesOperation-bound capability minted after local dashboard confirmation; agents cannot mint it or substitute an actor field.
expected_projection_revisionYesCurrent label-projection revision from the library response; stale writes are refused.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv3.12.1

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, it explains that a dashboard-minted user_intent_token is required, that no actor string grants authority, that the decision cannot be overridden, and that retries require identical arguments. These are material behavioral constraints for a destructive/idempotent write.

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 four concise sentences, front-loading purpose and alternative before auth and retry constraints. Each sentence contributes operational context without repetition.

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 complex mutation with rich annotations and complete input-schema descriptions, the description covers scope, alternative, authorization, projection revision, and retry semantics. It is complete enough for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the schema already explains user_intent_token, expected_projection_revision, and operation_key semantics. The description reinforces those constraints but adds little parameter-level meaning beyond the schema.

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 first sentence names a specific verb (Record) and resource (pin/unpin/move decision for one item's shelf membership). It also explicitly differentiates from apply_reshelving by limiting scope to an individual decision.

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 gives a direct use case and names the alternative tool for run-wide changes. It also states the authorization prerequisite, leaving little ambiguity about when this tool is appropriate.

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