failecho

Report whether a recovery action worked

report_recovery_outcome

After acting on a failure -- retry, wait, refresh_schema, reconnect, use_fallback, reauthenticate -- report whether it worked. Every recommendation others get is built from these. Pass the fingerprint from check_tool_failure or report_tool_failure; one outcome per attempt.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`action`	Yes	What you tried, e.g. 'refresh_schema' ([a-z0-9_.-]).
`successful`	Yes	True when the action resolved the failure.
`fingerprint`	Yes	From check_tool_failure or report_tool_failure (32 hex chars).
`reporter_id`	No	Optional stable agent id; hashed, never stored raw.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedSep 19, 2026
- removedInput schema / properties / reporter_id / anyOf
```
Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "maxLength": 200,
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
```
- removedInput schema / properties / reporter_id / default
```
Removed value: -null
```
- addedInput schema / properties / reporter_id / maxLength
```
Added value: +200
```
- addedInput schema / properties / reporter_id / type
```
Added value: +"string"
```

Changed7 schema fields changedSep 17, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / action / description

Previous value: -"What you tried, e.g. 'refresh_schema'. Lowercase, [a-z0-9_.-], spaces become underscores."New value: +"What you tried, e.g. 'refresh_schema' ([a-z0-9_.-])."

removedInput schema / properties / action / title
```
Removed value: -"Action"
```

changedInput schema / properties / fingerprint / description

Previous value: -"Fingerprint from check_tool_failure or report_tool_failure (32 lowercase hex characters)."New value: +"From check_tool_failure or report_tool_failure (32 hex chars)."

removedInput schema / properties / fingerprint / title
```
Removed value: -"Fingerprint"
```
removedInput schema / properties / reporter_id / title
```
Removed value: -"Reporter Id"
```
removedInput schema / properties / successful / title
```
Removed value: -"Successful"
```

removedInput schema / title

Removed value: -"report_recovery_outcomeArguments"

First observedSep 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only show all hints false, so the description adds value by explaining that 'Every recommendation others get is built from these'—indicating the report feeds a recommendation system. It also adds the 'one outcome per attempt' constraint. It doesn't disclose side effects like rate limits, but the added context is meaningful.

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?

Two tightly written sentences: the first front-loads the trigger condition and action, the second explains the importance and the fingerprint requirement. No wasted words or repetition of schema details.

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?

The description covers when to use, what to report, and where to get the fingerprint, which is sufficient for a tool with 3 required parameters and a full output schema. The output schema already covers return values, so nothing critical is missing.

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 100%, with each parameter already described including patterns (fingerprint hex) and maximum lengths. The description reinforces fingerprint provenance and adds the 'one outcome per attempt' rule, but this is usage guidance rather than new parameter meaning. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 the exact action and resource: 'report whether it worked' after acting on a failure, with a specific list of recovery actions (retry, wait, refresh_schema, etc.). It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings by focusing on recovery outcomes rather than initial failure reporting.

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 explicitly says when to use: 'After acting on a failure... report whether it worked,' and instructs to pass the fingerprint from check_tool_failure or report_tool_failure, with one outcome per attempt. It does not explicitly name alternatives to avoid or state when-not, but the context is clear enough.

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

All failecho 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.