sync_nowTrigger an immediate sync from Notion. Checks for any posts with trigger statuses and queues sync jobs. Pro plan only. Has a 15-second cooldown between calls.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| message | Yes | ||
| triggered | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description discloses meaningful behavioral details beyond annotations: it checks trigger statuses, queues sync jobs, requires a Pro plan, and enforces a 15-second cooldown. The readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false annotations are not contradicted; the description enriches them with real operational context.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Three short, purposeful sentences cover the action, the internal process, and the constraints. Every sentence adds value and the description is front-loaded with the core purpose before details.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With no parameters and an output schema present, the description does not need to explain return values. It fully covers what the tool does, how it behaves, and the operational limits, making it complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
This tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to add beyond what the schema already shows. The baseline of 4 applies because no parameter documentation burden exists.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description opens with 'Trigger an immediate sync from Notion,' which clearly states the verb, resource, and action. It further explains the internal behavior ('checks for posts with trigger statuses and queues sync jobs'), making it easily distinguishable from sibling tools like publish_post or update_post.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description gives clear context for when to use the tool: when an immediate sync from Notion is desired. It also adds operational constraints ('Pro plan only', '15-second cooldown'), though it does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not scenarios. The uniqueness of the action makes exclusions less necessary.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools target clearly distinct resources and actions, separating creation, updates, deletions, list/get operations, and job monitoring. The main ambiguity is between direct_publish and publish_post, since both involve publishing, though their descriptions clarify creation vs. making a draft live.
The majority of tools follow a clear verb_noun pattern: create_post, get_post, list_posts, update_post, delete_post, publish_post, list_categories, list_tags. The exceptions are direct_publish and sync_now, which deviate from the pattern but remain understandable.
13 tools is well-scoped for a blogging and sync workflow covering posts, publishing, jobs, categories, tags, and settings. Each tool addresses a distinct part of the pipeline without redundancy or excessive granularity.
The surface covers the core post lifecycle, publishing jobs, sync triggers, WordPress metadata, and settings. The only notable gap is that direct_publish creates a WordPress post outside of Notion, while update_post explicitly syncs back from Notion, so updating a direct-published post may not be covered.