Ankra

Ticket nest

ticket_nest

Nest a ticket under the root ticket whose problem explains it, as a symptom, instead of closing it as a duplicate; detach true takes it out again. The root carries the work: the symptom gets no run or thread of its own and settles or detaches when the root closes. A person's open question stays on it. Refused for closed tickets, subtasks, loops and work a person holds.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "reason": "<reason>"
    },
    "name": "ticket_nest"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`detach`	No	Take it out from under its root instead.
`reason`	Yes	Why, for both timelines. At most 1000 characters.
`ticket_id`	No	Or the ticket's UUID.
`ticket_number`	No	The ticket's number.
`root_ticket_id`	No	Or the root's UUID.
`root_ticket_number`	No	The number of the root that explains it.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 3, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnly=false, destructive=false, idempotent=false), it explains what nesting actually does: the root carries the work, the symptom gets no run or thread of its own, it settles or detaches when the root closes, and open person questions stay on it. Reversibility via detach is consistent with destructiveHint=false, and refusal conditions are disclosed.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Roughly four dense sentences with the core action and the duplicate-closing contrast front-loaded. Some phrasing is idiomatic and slightly opaque ("whose problem explains it", "settles"), but nothing is redundant.

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 state-changing tool with no output schema and no permission annotations, the description covers lifecycle, reversibility, and refusal conditions well. It stops short of saying what the response contains or what authorization is needed, which are the remaining gaps.

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 coverage is 100%, so all six parameters are already documented, and the description only reinforces the meaning of detach=true. It adds no interpretation of reason or of choosing ticket_id versus ticket_number, so baseline 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 definition opens with a specific verb and resource ("Nest a ticket under the root ticket") and immediately distinguishes the operation from the obvious sibling behavior of "closing it as a duplicate." An agent can tell this apart from close_support_ticket or ticket_update_status without opening any schema.

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?

It states the positive condition (the root's problem explains the ticket, treated as a symptom) and the alternative it replaces (closing as duplicate), plus explicit refusal cases: closed tickets, subtasks, loops, and person-held work. The detach=true path is also flagged as the inverse operation.

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

All Ankra tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.