Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Arbituro

by com.arbituro
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Claim a done-when is met

claim_done

Record that you believe one of a job's done-when clauses is now met, with your evidence. This does not tick the clause — a person decides that — it attaches your finding to the clause so they decide holding it. Say what you actually checked.

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": {
      "project": "<project>",
      "job": "<job>",
      "clause": "<clause>",
      "evidence": "<evidence>"
    },
    "name": "claim_done"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
jobYesThe job's key, e.g. FLAIR-12.
clauseYesThe clause's text, or enough of its beginning to identify it uniquely.
projectYesThe project's key, e.g. FLAIR.
evidenceYesWhat you checked and what you found. This is the evidence a person reads before deciding.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark this as a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent write. The description adds the important behavioral fact that the claim does not tick the clause and instead attaches a finding for human review, which materially affects how an agent should use it. It does not address duplicate claims or what happens after submission.

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 short and front-loaded, leading with the action and then immediately clarifying the human-decision boundary. The final sentence is somewhat redundant with the evidence field but still useful as emphasis.

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 simple four-required-parameter write tool with no output schema, the description covers the core behavior and the human-review boundary adequately. Minor gaps remain around duplicate claims and post-submission visibility, but nothing essential for correct invocation 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%, so the parameters are already well documented. The description still adds meaningful guidance for the evidence parameter by emphasizing that the agent should say what it actually checked, reinforcing evidence quality beyond the schema wording.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: record a belief that a job's done-when clause is met, attaching evidence. It also clearly distinguishes this from actually completing the clause, so an agent can tell what the tool does and does not do.

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?

It gives a clear trigger: use this when you believe a done-when clause is now met, and supplies concrete evidence. The explicit note that a person makes the final decision clarifies the tool's role, though it does not name sibling alternatives such as post_note or propose_job_update.

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

All Arbituro 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