Skip to main content
Glama

Prayer times for prayer

prayer_reflection
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get today's Islamic reflection — a verse of the Quran with its surah, a saying of the Prophet, and a name of Allah

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, establishing a clear safety profile. The description adds context about the return contents (verse, saying, name of Allah) but does not elaborate on response format or potential variations, which is acceptable given the simple read-only nature.

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?

The description is a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and efficiently lists the components. Every word adds value, and there is no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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?

For a zero-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description clearly specifies what the tool returns. It could mention whether the reflection changes daily or how the output is structured, but given the tool's simplicity, the current description is sufficient for an agent to understand its purpose.

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 zero parameters, so schema description coverage is effectively 100%. The description does not need to explain parameter semantics, and the baseline for zero-param tools is 4.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves 'today's Islamic reflection' and specifies its components (Quran verse, hadith, name of Allah). This distinguishes it from siblings like prayer_times or prayer_verse, which focus on different aspects of prayer.

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 implies usage for obtaining a daily reflection but does not explicitly state when to choose it over siblings or provide exclusions. No alternative tools are mentioned, so guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Every tool is prefixed with a clear domain (e.g., apps_, blog_, transit_), and the suffix identifies a distinct action or resource. Overlapping tools like archive_search and news_search are explicitly differentiated in their descriptions.

Naming Consistency4/5

All tools consistently use a domain_prefix_suffix pattern, but the suffix is sometimes a verb (create, list, search) and sometimes a noun (inbox, status, address). This minor mixing prevents a perfect score but remains predictable and readable.

Tool Count2/5

With 113 tools, the count is far beyond the typical well-scoped range, even for a broad personal assistant. While each tool is distinct and serves a purpose, the sheer number is overwhelming and could be better organized into separate domain-specific servers.

Completeness4/5

Each domain has near-complete lifecycle coverage, including CRUD and search where relevant, with only minor gaps such as missing apps_delete or events_update. The wide range of covered domains itself demonstrates strong completeness for a general assistant.