Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Plith Rigor

by ai.plith
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

rigor_workflows

Read-onlyIdempotent

List and search Rigor workflows for your organization, with filtering and pagination. Returns status, progress, capacity usage, and available actions per workflow. Use to monitor workflow state, understand concurrent limit usage, identify stuck or completed workflows, and — via q — find prior work on a subject before commissioning it again. Pair a q hit with rigor_status to read that workflow's deliverable.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "rigor_workflows"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qNoSearch the workflow title and task description. Every whitespace-separated term must appear in one or the other, as a case-insensitive substring — so "vector search postgres" matches a task described as "add vector search to an existing Postgres-backed SaaS app". Substring matching, not full-text: there is no stemming and no ranking, so "migrating" does not match "migration". Max 200 characters and 8 terms; punctuation is treated as a separator and wildcards are not supported.
limitNoPage size (default 20, max 100)
cursorNoPagination cursor (created_at timestamp from previous page)
statusNoFilter by status (comma-separated). Valid values: executing, step_executing, completed, failed, halted, pending_approval, cancelled. E.g. "halted,failed,pending_approval"
folder_idNoFilter by folder ID. Pass "unassigned" for workflows in no folder
task_typeNoFilter by classified task type
created_afterNoISO timestamp — only workflows created after this time
created_beforeNoISO timestamp — only workflows created before this time
counts_toward_limitNoFilter to workflows counting toward the concurrent limit

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "concurrent_summary": {
-      "properties": {
-        "active": {
-          "type": "number"
-        },
-        "limit": {
-          "type": "number"
-        },
-        "remaining": {
-          "type": "number"
-        }
-      },
-      "type": "object"
-    },
-    "credits_remaining": {
-      "type": "number"
-    },
-    "ok": {
-      "type": "boolean"
-    },
-    "pagination": {
-      "properties": {
-        "cursor": {
-          "type": "string"
-        },
-        "has_more": {
-          "type": "boolean"
-        },
-        "limit": {
-          "type": "number"
-        },
-        "total_count": {
-          "type": "number"
-        }
-      },
-      "type": "object"
-    },
-    "workflows": {
-      "items": {
-        "properties": {
-          "available_actions": {
-            "items": {
-              "type": "string"
-            },
-            "type": "array"
-          },
-          "completed_at": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "counts_toward_limit": {
-            "type": "boolean"
-          },
-          "created_at": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "credits_charged": {
-            "type": "number"
-          },
-          "current_step": {
-            "type": "number"
-          },
-          "generated_title": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "history_locked": {
-            "type": "boolean"
-          },
-          "started_at": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "status": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "task_excerpt": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "task_type": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "total_steps": {
-            "type": "number"
-          },
-          "workflow_id": {
-            "type": "string"
-          }
-        },
-        "type": "object"
-      },
-      "type": "array"
-    }
-  },
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description goes beyond them by disclosing what the response contains (status, progress, capacity usage, available actions per workflow), which tells the agent the listing is self-sufficient for triage. It does not state ordering or default sort, a minor omission.

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, front-loaded with the operation, then the return shape, then the use cases and the sibling hand-off. No restatement of the name or title, and every clause contributes new information.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a nine-parameter, all-optional list tool with no output schema, the description compensates by summarizing the returned fields and the monitoring use cases. Combined with the fully documented schema, an agent has enough to call it correctly and interpret the result.

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%, including the detailed q substring-matching semantics and the status enum values, so the schema carries the parameter burden. The description adds intent-level framing — q is for finding prior work on a subject, and capacity usage relates to the concurrent limit — but no syntax or format detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource — 'List and search Rigor workflows for your organization' — and immediately scopes it with 'filtering and pagination'. It also draws a clear boundary against the nearest sibling by directing single-workflow reads to rigor_status, so an agent can distinguish list/search from status lookup without inspecting either schema.

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 names four concrete situations for use: monitoring workflow state, understanding concurrent-limit usage, spotting stuck or completed workflows, and checking prior work before commissioning again. It also routes the follow-up step to rigor_status. There is no explicit 'do not use this for X' statement, which keeps it just short of a 5.

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

All Plith Rigor 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