Skip to main content
Glama
sheacoding

MCP Reminder

by sheacoding

check_all_reminders

Check all expired alarms and todo items to identify pending notifications and overdue tasks for timely follow-up.

Instructions

一次性检查所有到期的提醒(闹钟和待办事项)

这是一个便捷工具,小智可以定期调用此接口来检查是否有需要提醒的内容

Returns: 包含所有到期闹钟和待办的汇总信息

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The tool 'check_all_reminders' is registered using @mcp.tool() and implemented to aggregate both alarms and todo items from the storage.
    @mcp.tool()
    def check_all_reminders() -> dict:
        """
        一次性检查所有到期的提醒(闹钟和待办事项)
    
        这是一个便捷工具,小智可以定期调用此接口来检查是否有需要提醒的内容
    
        Returns:
            包含所有到期闹钟和待办的汇总信息
        """
        # 获取到期闹钟
        pending_alarms = storage.get_pending_alarms()
    
        # 获取到期待办
        pending_todos = storage.get_pending_todos()
    
        total_count = len(pending_alarms) + len(pending_todos)
    
        logger.info(f"检查所有提醒,找到 {len(pending_alarms)} 个闹钟和 {len(pending_todos)} 个待办")
    
        if total_count == 0:
            return {
                "success": True,
                "has_reminders": False,
                "total_count": 0,
                "alarms": [],
                "todos": [],
                "message": "当前没有到期的提醒"
            }
    
        # 构建闹钟数据
        alarms_data = [
            {
                "id": alarm.id,
                "time": alarm.time,
                "description": alarm.description,
                "type": "alarm"
            }
            for alarm in pending_alarms
        ]
    
        # 构建待办数据
        todos_data = [
            {
                "id": todo.id,
                "title": todo.title,
                "description": todo.description,
                "remind_time": todo.remind_time,
                "type": "todo"
            }
            for todo in pending_todos
        ]
    
        # 生成提醒消息
        messages = []
        if pending_alarms:
            for alarm in pending_alarms:
                msg = f"闹钟提醒: {alarm.description if alarm.description else '时间到了'}"
                messages.append(msg)
    
        if pending_todos:
            for todo in pending_todos:
                msg = f"待办提醒: {todo.title}"
                messages.append(msg)
    
        return {
            "success": True,
            "has_reminders": True,
            "total_count": total_count,
            "alarm_count": len(pending_alarms),
            "todo_count": len(pending_todos),
            "alarms": alarms_data,
            "todos": todos_data,
            "messages": messages,
            "message": f"有 {total_count} 个提醒到期"
        }
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions that it returns '包含所有到期闹钟和待办的汇总信息' ('summary information of all expired alarms and todos'), which gives some insight into output behavior. However, it lacks details on critical aspects like whether this is a read-only operation, if it modifies data (e.g., marks reminders as checked), error handling, or rate limits. For a tool with no annotations, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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?

The description is concise and well-structured in three sentences: it states the purpose, provides usage context, and describes the return value. Each sentence adds value without redundancy. It's front-loaded with the core functionality. However, it could be slightly more efficient by combining ideas, but overall, it's appropriately sized with minimal waste.

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?

Given the context: no annotations, no output schema, 0 parameters, and sibling tools like 'get_pending_alarms' and 'get_pending_todos,' the description is moderately complete. It covers the purpose, usage, and return value, but lacks details on behavioral traits (e.g., safety, side effects) and doesn't fully differentiate from siblings. For a tool with no structured data support, it should provide more behavioral context to be fully helpful.

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?

The tool has 0 parameters, and the input schema has 100% description coverage (though empty). The description doesn't need to add parameter semantics since there are none. According to the rules, for 0 parameters, the baseline score is 4, as there's nothing to compensate for. The description correctly doesn't mention any parameters, which is appropriate.

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's purpose: '一次性检查所有到期的提醒(闹钟和待办事项)' which translates to 'Check all expired reminders (alarms and todos) at once.' It specifies the verb ('check') and resources ('reminders, alarms, todos'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'get_pending_alarms' or 'get_pending_todos,' which might offer similar functionality with different scopes or filters.

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 description provides some usage context: '这是一个便捷工具,小智可以定期调用此接口来检查是否有需要提醒的内容' meaning 'This is a convenient tool, Xiao Zhi can call this interface regularly to check if there is content that needs reminding.' This implies when to use it (regularly for checking) and suggests it's for automated or periodic checks. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives among siblings, leaving some ambiguity compared to tools like 'get_pending_alarms'.

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/sheacoding/mcp-reminder'

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