Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Marsell

by com.getmarsell
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Work get

work_get
Read-only

Opens one piece of the plan's work whole: the row with its brief, reason, day, state and forecast; its history, newest kept when it is long; its outcome over the last 90 days (totals by metric, behind, on or ahead of its forecast, and the sources); every observation attributed to it; and, when it waited on a card, what making that card's work cost in tokens (the ledger's own count, or a note that none was recorded). Use it after work_list, or for a work id another tool gave; for many rows' results at once use outcomes_summary. An id that is not on the ledger is refused.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "work_get"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe work row's id, as work_list, outcomes_summary or crm_timeline give it.
projectNoThe project's id or exact name. Optional when the account has one project.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered; the description then adds real behavioral context beyond that: history is truncated with newest kept, the outcome window is fixed at 90 days, the token cost falls back to a note when none was recorded, and unknown ids are refused. These are exactly the behaviors an agent cannot infer from annotations.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded and the routing guidance comes last, which is the right order. The middle enumeration is long and reads as one run-on sentence, but every item listed is return-value information that no output schema supplies, so the length is largely earned rather than padding.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the burden of explaining what comes back, and it does so comprehensively: row fields, history with truncation rule, 90-day outcome breakdown, attributed observations, and token cost. Combined with full schema coverage of the two inputs, an agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

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% and both parameters are documented in the schema, including the id's provenance and the project's optionality. The description only loosely reinforces that id comes from another tool and never mentions the project parameter, so it adds nothing beyond structured data — baseline 3.

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 ('Opens one piece of the plan's work whole') and immediately enumerates the sub-resources returned (brief, reason, day, state, forecast, history, outcome, observations, token ledger cost). It is clearly distinguishable from work_list (which lists) and outcomes_summary (which aggregates many rows), so an agent can pick it without opening any schema.

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?

Gives explicit sequencing ('Use it after work_list, or for a work id another tool gave') and an explicit exclusion with the alternative named ('for many rows' results at once use outcomes_summary'). It also states the failure condition ('An id that is not on the ledger is refused'), so both when-to-use and when-not-to-use are covered.

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

All Marsell 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