RelayLink

Close something off

resolve_item

Idempotent

Close something the user was tracking, optionally naming the package that answered it. Resolving with no answering package is how the user drops something they are no longer waiting for — there is no separate untrack. Private, like the tracking itself: nobody is told and nothing is sent. It clears a reminder set with remind_me the same way.

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": {
      "itemId": "<itemId>"
    },
    "name": "resolve_item"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`itemId`	Yes	The item_id whats_new gives.
`answeredBy`	No	Optionally the package_id that answered it.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 28, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Goes beyond the annotations by disclosing side effects the flags don't convey: nothing is sent, nobody is notified, and a reminder set via remind_me is cleared. It does not say whether a resolution can be undone or whether the item can be re-tracked afterward, which is the main remaining gap for a mutation.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the action, then the default-case semantics, then the privacy/side-effect note. Slightly conversational ("Private, like the tracking itself") but no sentence is filler; only "something" costs precision.

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 2-parameter close operation with annotations covering idempotency and safety, this covers action, the null case, side effects, and privacy. With no output schema, the one thing left unexplained is what the call returns (or whether the item disappears from lists), which an agent may want to confirm before reporting success.

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 earns more by giving the semantic of the null default for answeredBy — omitting it means the user is abandoning the item, not just leaving attribution blank. That is real added meaning beyond the schema's "optionally the package_id that answered it".

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+object pair (close a tracked item, optionally naming the answering package) and implicitly contrasts with tracking. The word "something" is vague where "item" would be precise, and the sibling track_item is never named, so the reader has to infer the pair from "the user was tracking".

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?

Explicitly rules out an alternative workflow: "there is no separate untrack" tells the agent not to look for one, and the no-answering-package case is spelled out as the drop path. It also flags interaction with remind_me. Missing an explicit "use track_item to add / resolve_item to close" routing statement, so not a 5.

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

All RelayLink 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.

Resources

Need Help?