Skip to main content
Glama
sikcapri

SuperGlookoQuery

by sikcapri
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersScoreDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

Split/extended bolus log and stats

get_split_bolus_log
Read-only

Retrieve extended/dual-wave bolus events with delivery percentages and durations to analyze split-bolus usage and correlate with post-meal glucose control.

Instructions

Every SPLIT (extended/dual-wave) bolus in the window — one with a real extended-delivery portion, not a normal single-shot dose — plus aggregate stats over the whole bolus population for the same window.

Each logged bolus carries initialDeliveryPercent and extendedDeliveryPercent (Glooko reports the split directly as a percent pair, e.g. 60/40), and durationString, Glooko's own raw formatted text for the extended portion's duration (e.g. "2h") — passed through as-is, not parsed, since no confirmed format spec exists for it across devices.

Use it to see whether/how often splitting is actually used, and whether the split ratio correlates with post-meal control (pair with get_meal_window_analysis on individual events).

Capped to 92 days per call. Times are plain wall clock time (device-local), not UTC.

Returns: window, stats (totalBoluses, splitCount, splitRatePercent, avgInitialDeliveryPercent — all null/0 for a window with no split boluses, which is a normal result for an automated closed-loop user, not an error), and a boluses array of the split events themselves.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
endYesRequired. Window end as an ISO 8601 timestamp, e.g. 2026-06-20T00:00:00.000Z — plain wall clock time, same caveat as start (the "Z" is a format artifact, not a UTC claim). Treated as inclusive and must be after start. All timestamps returned by this API are likewise plain wall clock time, unconverted.
startYesRequired. Window start as an ISO 8601 timestamp, e.g. 2026-06-19T00:00:00.000Z. IMPORTANT: despite the trailing "Z", this is plain WALL CLOCK time, not true UTC — Glooko records only the literal date/time the patient's device showed, with no timezone attached. Use the patient's own wall-clock digits directly (no conversion): resolve "yesterday" or "last 3 weeks" straight into the matching wall-clock date and time. Treated as inclusive.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true, but the description adds critical behavioral context: the 92-day cap, wall-clock vs UTC time handling, the pass-through of durationString without parsing, and the interpretation of null/0 stats as a normal result for closed-loop users (not an error). This significantly enriches beyond the annotation.

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?

Well-structured: opens with the purpose, then details the data shape, moves to use cases, and finishes with caps and return format. Each sentence adds value; no redundancy. Though slightly long, the complexity of the tool justifies it.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description fully compensates by enumerating the exact return fields (window, stats, boluses) with sub-fields and their null/0 behavior. It also explains durationString. The description gives everything an agent needs to correctly interpret results and decide on invocation.

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% — both start and end parameters have thorough descriptions including timezone caveats and inclusivity semantics. The tool description adds no extra parameter-level information; it's all covered in the schema. Thus, the baseline of 3 applies.

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 description states a specific resource (split/extended bolus log) with explicit scope (only boluses with an extended-delivery portion, excluding normal single-shot doses) and differentiates it from a general bolus log. It directly addresses the sibling get_enriched_bolus_log by clarifying what makes this tool unique.

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?

Provides explicit use cases: 'see whether/how often splitting is actually used' and 'whether the split ratio correlates with post-meal control' with a concrete pairing recommendation (get_meal_window_analysis). Also imposes a hard cap of 92 days, informing agent decisions on window size.

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