Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
SetLuca

SetLuca

Official
by setluca
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Mark an insight read

luca_insights_mark_read
DestructiveIdempotent

Mark one insight read, so it stops coming back at the top of the feed.

Instructions

Mark one insight read, so it stops coming back at the top of the feed.

Luca operation: POST /api/insights/{id}/read Required scopes: insights:write Required OAuth scope: luca:draft; data sensitivity: redacted Requires Idempotency-Key. Provide idempotencyKey for safe retries, or the server will generate one. Use workspaceId or workspaceSlug to override the default workspace configured by environment.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "luca_insights_mark_read"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
workspaceIdNoOptional Luca workspace id override.
workspaceSlugNoOptional Luca workspace slug override.
idempotencyKeyNoStable key for safe retries. If omitted, the MCP server generates a unique key for this call.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses the auth/scoping requirements (insights:write, luca:draft), the redaction sensitivity level, the idempotency-key requirement with server-side fallback, and workspace override precedence. That is meaningful operational context. It falls short of 5 because it never explains what state change actually occurs or whether the mark can be undone, which matters given destructiveHint=true.

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 first line is well front-loaded, but it is followed by a boilerplate block of endpoint, scope, sensitivity, idempotency and workspace lines, several of which restate the schema or annotations. It reads as generated scaffolding rather than curated guidance.

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

Completeness3/5

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

With an output schema present, return values need not be explained, and the annotations cover mutability and idempotency. The remaining gap is conceptual: nothing explains how 'read' differs from 'dismiss' or 'mark actioned' among the sibling tools, which is the main thing an agent needs to choose 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 coverage is 75%, so the schema already carries most parameter meaning and the baseline is 3. The description reinforces idempotencyKey behavior and clarifies that workspaceId/workspaceSlug override the environment-configured default, which is genuinely additive, but it says nothing about the required 'id' or how the two workspace selectors interact.

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?

States a concrete verb and resource ("Mark one insight read") plus the observable effect ("stops coming back at the top of the feed"). That is clear, but it does not distinguish itself from close siblings like luca_insights_dismiss or luca_insights_mark_actioned, so an agent must infer the difference.

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?

The outcome clause implies the usage scenario (clearing an insight from the feed), which is enough context to act. However, there is no explicit when-to-use vs. when-not guidance and no reference to the dismiss/actioned alternatives that clearly overlap with this tool.

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