Skip to main content
Glama

cognitive.execute_task

One-call orchestration: identify → gate → guide → solve → verify → report.

Parameters:
- task: Dict containing:
  - task_structure (or loose definition: name, entities, constraints, etc.)
  - raw (optional): Domain-specific execution payload. If omitted, returns
    status='guidance_only' with 'recommended_action'='supply_raw' and
    an 'expected_raw_formats' object detailing valid schemas.
    Supported problem types for task.raw:
    * scheduling: {"workers": [{"id": "w1", "eligible_shifts": ["s1"], "max_shifts": 1}],
                   "shifts": [{"id": "s1", "required_workers": 1}]}
    * allocation: {"consumers": [{"id": "c1", "demands": {"r1": 1}}],
                   "resources": [{"id": "r1", "capacity": 2}]}
    * graph: {"nodes": ["A", "B"], "edges": [["A", "B"]]}
    * graph_coloring: {"nodes": ["A", "B"], "edges": [["A", "B"]], "colors": ["red", "blue"]}
    * shortest_path: {"nodes": ["A", "B"], "edges": [["A", "B"]], "weights": {"A->B": 1.0}, "start": "A", "target": "B"}
    * math: {"math": {"question": "...", "quantities": {...}, "equations": [...], "target_variable": "x", "ground_truth": 42.0}}
    * code: {"code": {"code": "def solution()...", "tests": ["assert ..."]}}
    * pddl: {"pddl": {"plan": [...], "init": {...}, "goal": {...}}}

Returns a single envelope with status (completed / guidance_only /
blocked_until_clarified / no_applicable_guidance / refused_infeasible /
failed), solution, score, assumptions, failure reasons, and expected_raw_formats.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
goalNo
taskNo
environmentNo
model_familyNogeneric

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / task / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -true
    • addedInput schema / properties / task / anyOf
      Added value: +[
      +  {
      +    "additionalProperties": true,
      +    "type": "object"
      +  },
      +  {
      +    "type": "null"
      +  }
      +]
    • addedInput schema / properties / task / default
      Added value: +null
    • removedInput schema / properties / task / type
      Removed value: -"object"
    • removedInput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
      -  "task"
      -]
  2. Added

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does disclose a conditional path (missing raw → guidance_only), a response envelope, and the complete set of possible statuses including blocked_until_clarified and refused_infeasible. It does not cover side effects or prerequisites, but the status and conditional behavior detail is substantial.

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 one-line pipeline summary front-loads the core purpose, and the Parameters/Returns sections are clearly organized. The description is long due to example payloads, but those examples earn their place by disambiguating accepted raw formats.

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?

Given the complexity of the tool and the generic input schema, the raw-format examples and status list are valuable, and the output schema covers return fields. Still, the description does not explain how goal, environment, or model_family affect the orchestration, nor what triggers statuses like blocked_until_clarified vs. refused_infeasible.

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?

The description adds significant meaning to the 'task' parameter, including nested structure and eight concrete raw payload examples, which is essential given the 0% schema coverage. However, 'goal', 'environment', and 'model_family' are left completely unexplained despite being free-form schema properties, so the coverage is uneven.

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 identifies a concrete behavior: 'One-call orchestration' with a staged pipeline (identify → gate → guide → solve → verify → report). This goes beyond a tautology and implies that this tool consolidates several cognitive steps, though it does not explicitly name or differentiate from sibling tools.

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?

It provides practical invocation guidance by listing supported problem types and clarifying that omitting task.raw yields a guidance_only response with expected_raw_formats. However, it never says when to prefer this orchestrator over individual siblings like cognitive.identify_task or cognitive.solve_arithmetic, and it offers no when-not-to-use conditions.

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