Skip to main content
Glama

proofite

by com.proofite

Change how the briefing is written

update_information_diet
Idempotent

Change how and when the briefing reaches this person: delivery time and days, length, technicality, depth, stance, tone, stated interests and topics to avoid, language, timezone, podcast and email delivery. Pass only the keys you want to change. Read get_information_diet first — these are global settings, not per-topic ones (for a single topic use tune_topic).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toneNocome deve scrivere («diretto, zero fuffa»)
avoidNocosa non vuole leggere mai
depthNo1 solo i fatti … 5 analisi e implicazioni
stanceNo1 neutro … 5 l'editor si sbilancia
languageNolingua del briefing e del podcast
timezoneNofuso orario IANA (Europe/Rome)
entry_mixNo1 poche voci trattate a fondo … 5 tante voci brevi (la lunghezza totale non cambia)
interestsNocosa seguire, in linguaggio naturale
digest_daysNogiorni della settimana, ISO 1=lunedì … 7=domenica
digest_timeNoorario di consegna, HH:MM nel fuso dell'utente
technicalityNo1 divulgativo … 5 da addetti ai lavori
digest_lengthNoquanto deve essere lungo
serper_enrichNoarricchire il briefing con ricerche web fresche
chicca_enabledNonei giorni senza notizie, una storia vera dall'archivio
digest_enabledNoricevere o meno il briefing quotidiano
podcast_enabledNogenerare anche l'episodio audio
podcast_minutesNodurata desiderata dell'episodio
email_digest_enabledNoricevere il briefing anche per email
smalltalking_enabledNoogni giorno, in coda al briefing, due o tre storie brevi da raccontare
weekly_recap_enabledNoriepilogo settimanale di ciò che non è stato letto

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / entry_mix
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "1 poche voci trattate a fondo … 5 tante voci brevi (la lunghezza totale non cambia)",
+  "maximum": 5,
+  "minimum": 1,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / smalltalking_enabled
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "ogni giorno, in coda al briefing, due o tre storie brevi da raccontare",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare idempotency and non-destructiveness, so the description does not need to restate those. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations by clarifying that the updates are global settings, that only provided keys are changed, and that it mutates settings rather than creating or deleting anything. This is consistent with readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=true.

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?

Three sentences with no waste: the first sentence front-loads the tool's full scope, the second gives the partial-update rule, and the third orients the agent with a prerequisite and a sibling alternative. Every sentence earns its place.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given a complex 20-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description is largely complete: it orients the agent to read the current settings first, limits scope to global settings, points to tune_topic for per-topic changes, and lists the affected dimensions. It does not describe return values, but none are expected for an update, and annotations cover safety/repeatability. A small gap is that it does not mention whether a confirmation or error is returned, but this is minor.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not explain individual parameter formats or meanings, and its "Pass only the keys you want to change" mirrors the schema's "Any subset of the settings". It adds the useful global-vs-per-topic framing but does not add new per-parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

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 verb and resource: "Change how and when the briefing reaches this person" and enumerates the many settings it covers. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tune_topic by explicitly saying these are global settings, not per-topic ones. An agent can immediately tell what this tool does and what it is not for.

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?

The description provides clear usage guidance: "Read get_information_diet first", "these are global settings, not per-topic ones", and "for a single topic use tune_topic". It also instructs partial updates with "Pass only the keys you want to change", leaving no ambiguity about when to use this tool versus alternatives.

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

All proofite toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools target distinct operations (e.g., add_feed vs. remove_feed, get_source vs. list_sources). However, there is some ambiguity between correct_briefing and tune_topic (both adjust content based on user feedback) and between request_deep_dive and correct_briefing (both can trigger deeper investigation). The descriptions help, but an agent could misselect.

Naming Consistency5/5

Tool names follow a very consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., add_feed, create_source, generate_briefing, list_sources). All use snake_case with clear, descriptive verbs and nouns. No mixing of conventions.

Tool Count4/5

With 27 tools, the server covers a rich domain of news feed management, briefing generation, and user preferences. This is slightly above the typical sweet spot but still reasonable given the complexity. Each tool serves a distinct purpose; the count is justified.

Completeness5/5

The tool set provides full lifecycle coverage: sources can be created, read, updated, and deleted; feeds and searches can be added and removed; briefings can be generated, listed, read, rated, and corrected; deep dives and read-later items are supported. There are no obvious gaps—the domain is thoroughly covered.

Resources