recall-kit

daily_brief

Summarize overdue and upcoming follow-ups, stale or blocked projects, and memory hygiene issues so you can plan the day and address maintenance gaps.

Instructions

Overdue and upcoming follow-ups, stale and blocked projects, memory hygiene.

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": "daily_brief"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`today`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 10, 2026

TDQS

C2.2/5.0

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 does not state whether the tool is read-only or mutating, what permissions are needed, how the brief is assembled, or what 'memory hygiene' entails.

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 description is very concise and contains no wasted words. However, it is a noun-phrase fragment rather than a front-loaded statement of action, so its brevity becomes under-specification.

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?

The output schema can explain return values, but the definition still omits invocation-critical context for a multi-domain tool. With no annotations and an undocumented 'today' parameter, the description does not give an agent enough to call the tool confidently.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema has one optional parameter, 'today', with 0% description coverage, and the description does not mention it at all. There is no explanation of expected format, timezone, or how the default null value changes behavior.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description lists the domains included in the brief: overdue and upcoming follow-ups, stale and blocked projects, and memory hygiene. However, it supplies no verb or explicit statement of what the tool does with them, so the agent must infer that it generates or returns a summary.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no routing guidance versus the memory_* and project_* sibling tools. The name 'daily_brief' implies a daily context, but the description itself does not state usage conditions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server