Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

RelayLink

by ai.relaylink
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Answer or progress the user's own item

project_work_update
Idempotent

Answer an assignment, or move a task's own progress — the user's OWN item only, and no confirm round, because it changes only what the user's own standing on it is. accept, decline or counterpropose (needs proposedDue) answer a new assignment; acknowledge clears a change the user has now seen; start, pause, ask_review, done, block and unblock move a task's own progress. OpenWorld is true because the assignor sees the result. Call it on the user's own say-so. This is shared with everybody on the project: every member can read it, so use these tools only for work the user means to be visible to the people they have put on this project. A private note, task or preference that is only the user's own is the notebook's (notebook_*) instead, and a bare "add a task" may be meant for another connected app — if more than one destination is plausible and the user has not said which, ask once and stay with the answer.

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": {
      "workItem": "<workItem>",
      "action": "<action>"
    },
    "name": "project_work_update"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actionYesaccept | decline | counterpropose | acknowledge | start | pause | ask_review | done | block | unblock.
workItemYesThe work_id from project_work_find or project_open.
proposedDueNoA different due date, for counterpropose only (2026-09-25).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Adds context annotations cannot carry: no confirmation round is required because only the user's own standing changes, the change is visible to every project member and the assignor (which is why openWorldHint is set), and clearing semantics for 'acknowledge'. It reinforces rather than contradicts readOnlyHint=false / destructiveHint=false by explaining that scope of mutation is limited to the user's own status.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose and scope, and the dense sentences largely earn their place; the 'add a task'/other-app note is tangential to this tool's function but is genuine disambiguation. It is a long single paragraph where a short structured split (scope / actions / visibility) would read faster.

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?

With three parameters, no output schema and full annotation coverage, the description supplies what annotations cannot: scope, visibility, confirmation behavior and alternatives. It stops short of failure modes (e.g. what happens when an item is not in a state that permits the requested action), which matters for a state-machine style tool.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning by grouping the ten action values into two families (assignment answers vs. progress moves) and noting that counterpropose requires proposedDue. That grouping is semantic information the schema's flat value list does not convey.

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?

States a specific set of verbs (answer/accept/decline/counterpropose/acknowledge/start/pause/ask_review/done/block/unblock) against a specific resource ('the user's OWN item'), and scopes it against the sibling family by excluding private state ('notebook_* instead'). An agent can distinguish it from project_work_find/project_open and notebook_* without opening a 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?

Explicit routing rules: use for the user's own standing only, use on the user's own say-so, use only for work intended to be visible to project members, use notebook_* for private notes/tasks/preferences, and ask once if a bare 'add a task' could target another connected app. When-to-use, when-not-to-use and the alternative destination are all named.

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

All RelayLink 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