Skip to main content
Glama

Get Fielding Progress

get_fielding_progress
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get qualifying completions versus the current target, completed interview quality counts, and a rate-based expected finish when enough progress exists.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
study_idYes
organization_idNoPlatform admins only: select an organization for this operation. Required when changing another organization’s study or using its wallet.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYesCurrent fielding progress.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / organization_id
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Platform admins only: select an organization for this operation. Required when changing another organization’s study or using its wallet.",
      +  "maxLength": 128,
      +  "minLength": 1,
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  2. Changed8 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / properties / study_id / pattern
      Added value: +"^([0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[1-8][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[89abAB][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12}|00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000|ffffffff-ffff-ffff-ffff-ffffffffffff)$"
    • changedOutput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • addedOutput schema / properties / result / properties / completed / maximum
      Added value: +9007199254740991
    • addedOutput schema / properties / result / properties / quality_mix / additionalProperties / maximum
      Added value: +9007199254740991
    • addedOutput schema / properties / result / properties / quality_mix / propertyNames
      Added value: +{
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • changedOutput schema / properties / result / properties / target / anyOf
      Previous value: -[
      -  {
      -    "type": "integer"
      -  },
      -  {
      -    "type": "null"
      -  }
      -]New value: +[
      +  {
      +    "maximum": 9007199254740991,
      +    "minimum": -9007199254740991,
      +    "type": "integer"
      +  },
      +  {
      +    "type": "null"
      +  }
      +]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by explaining what metrics are returned (completions vs target, quality counts, expected finish) and the condition 'when enough progress exists' signals a possible partial result. However, it doesn't detail auth requirements or rate limits beyond the organization_id note in schema.

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?

The description is a single efficient sentence that front-loads the key returned content. It avoids redundancy and is appropriately sized for a read-only tool.

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?

Given the tool has an output schema, the description needn't detail return values. It covers the core purpose and a conditional behavior, and annotations cover safety. The only gap is lack of explicit usage context in a dense sibling set, but overall it is nearly complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 50%; the organization_id parameter is well-documented in the schema itself, and study_id is required with format constraints. The description adds no parameter-level semantics. With one parameter documented and one lacking a description, baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting for the documented parameter, but the description could clarify organization_id scoping.

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?

The description clearly states the specific resource and content: qualifying completions vs target, quality counts, and a rate-based expected finish. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_study or get_interview_usage_stats. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other study-related progress tools, leaving slight ambiguity in a large sibling set.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The phrase 'when enough progress exists' implies a usage condition, but no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives is provided. In a sibling set with many study tools, an agent would have to infer that this is for monitoring fielding progress, not for pausing, stopping, or configuring studies.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources