Forwardsmith buyer desk (read-only)

Routing preview for one process

scope_mapping_session

Read-onlyIdempotent

Takes one process as 2-20 steps and returns per step whether it is handled by code (MCP/API), by a model (and on which route) or by a person, whether a redaction gate comes first and whether human approval is needed. Fixed rule table from the published method; no model is called. A preview of what the Information Flow Mapping Session does with your team, not a design. Describe steps in general words; no personal data.

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": {
      "process_name": "<process_name>",
      "steps": "<steps>"
    },
    "name": "scope_mapping_session"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`lang`	No	en
`steps`	Yes
`process_name`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`offer`	Yes
`steps`	Yes
`source`	Yes
`totals`	Yes
`process`	Yes
`golden_rule`	Yes
`what_this_is`	Yes
`questions_for_the_mapping_session`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 13, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond that: 'Fixed rule table from the published method; no model is called', which tells the agent results are deterministic and rule-based. It does not discuss latency, limits, or error behavior, so it is solid but not rich.

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?

Three dense sentences, front-loaded with the input shape and output shape, then scope and constraints. Every sentence carries information; the phrasing is compact but readable.

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?

An output schema exists, yet the description still summarizes the return shape, and it covers input constraints and determinism. For a read-only preview tool with a documented schema, this is close to complete; only the enum semantics for `kind` are left implicit.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the load. It adds real meaning for `steps` (2-20 items, general words, no personal data) but leaves the `kind` enum values and the `lang` parameter unexplained, so it only partially compensates for the coverage gap.

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 ('takes one process as 2-20 steps') and precisely what it returns: per-step routing to code/model/person, redaction gate, and approval need. The closing line ('A preview of what the Information Flow Mapping Session does with your team, not a design') separates it from design-oriented siblings.

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?

Gives clear usage context ('preview, not a design') and an input constraint ('describe steps in general words; no personal data'). It does not name a specific alternative tool or state when-not-to-use beyond the preview/design distinction, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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

All Forwardsmith buyer desk (read-only) 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.

Resources

Need Help?