Lovie Company Formation

Get Approval Session Status

approval_session_get_approval_session_status

Read-only

Read the status of a trusted-device approval session: PENDING, APPROVED, REJECTED or EXPIRED. For a transfer, call this with the approval_session_id from request_transfer_approval once the user says they have answered on their phone, and call commit_transfer only when it returns APPROVED. Poll once per user prompt, not in a loop; a session expires about 5 minutes after it was opened.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`sessionId`	Yes	UUID value wrapper.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`status`	No
`updatedAt`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedSep 10, 2026
- addedOutput schema / properties / updatedAt / anyOf
```
Added value: +[
+  {
+    "format": "date-time",
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / updatedAt / format
```
Removed value: -"date-time"
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / updatedAt / type
```
Removed value: -"string"
```
First observedAug 11, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds behavior the annotations cannot: the ~5 minute expiry window after the session was opened and the explicit anti-polling instruction ('not in a loop'), which is real operational context. It stops short of describing the response shape, though an output schema exists.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and the status values, then layers usage constraints and lifecycle facts in two tight sentences. Every clause earns its place; no filler or redundant restatement of the title.

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 polled status tool with annotations covering safety and an output schema covering return values, the description supplies everything else an agent needs: the possible statuses, the caller sequence, the polling cadence, and the expiry window. Nothing material is missing.

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% and there is only one parameter, so the schema carries the type/format burden. The description goes beyond it by specifying the provenance of the value ('the approval_session_id from request_transfer_approval'), which tells the agent where to obtain the id rather than just its shape.

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 verb and resource ('Read the status of a trusted-device approval session') and enumerates the exact status values (PENDING, APPROVED, REJECTED, EXPIRED), which pins the resource down precisely. It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling request_transfer_approval and commit_transfer that it references.

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?

Explicitly names the trigger (once the user says they have answered on their phone), the id source (from request_transfer_approval), the downstream action gated on the result (call commit_transfer only when it returns APPROVED), and the polling policy ('once per user prompt, not in a loop'). This is textbook when/when-not/alternative guidance with nothing left to inference.

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

All Lovie Company Formation 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.