Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Summer

by ai.gosummer
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Prepare the exact current plan and return its execution ID, approval hash and reviewed work

summer_actions_prepare
Destructive

Prepare the exact current plan and return its execution ID, approval hash and reviewed work. Does not approve or execute. A delegated actions.approve grant can approve authorized work through API, CLI or MCP.

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": {
      "company": "<company>",
      "environment": "<environment>",
      "case": "<case>",
      "plan_request_id": "<plan_request_id>"
    },
    "name": "summer_actions_prepare"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
caseYes
companyYesSummer company ID
environmentYesEnvironment that owns the resource
idempotency_keyNoReuse the same key when retrying the same change
plan_request_idYes
replaces_executionNoReplace an unapproved, unstarted queued execution whose source or selected plan changed. Existing approvals and uncertain work cannot be replaced.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / replaces_execution
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Replace an unapproved, unstarted queued execution whose source or selected plan changed. Existing approvals and uncertain work cannot be replaced.",
+  "format": "uuid",
+  "pattern": "^([0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[1-8][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[89abAB][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12}|00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000|ffffffff-ffff-ffff-ffff-ffffffffffff)$",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description adds useful behavioral context by stating that it does not approve or execute and by mentioning the delegated actions.approve grant. However, annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description does not explain the destructive side effects, replace semantics, or non-idempotent behavior beyond what the schema hints at.

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 three tight sentences, front-loads the main purpose, then adds the key operational distinction and approval context. There is no filler.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The description covers the core purpose and return fields and clarifies that it does not approve or execute. But for a destructive, open-world preparation tool with six parameters, it does not explain what preparation changes or destroys, and it leaves key parameter semantics undocumented.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 67%, with company, environment, idempotency_key, and replaces_execution documented, but case and plan_request_id lack descriptions. The tool description itself adds no parameter meaning at all, so it fails to compensate for those two required parameters.

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: preparing the exact current plan and returning its execution ID, approval hash, and reviewed work. It explicitly distinguishes this from approving or executing, so an agent can separate it from the sibling summer_actions_approve tool.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It clarifies that this tool does not approve or execute and notes that a delegated actions.approve grant handles authorization through API, CLI, or MCP. This gives clear context for using prepare separately from approval, though it does not explicitly name summer_actions_approve or spell out the full workflow sequence.

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

All Summer toolsInspect
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.

Resources