Skip to main content
Glama

Sliq

by com.getsliq
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Report Enactment Blocked

report_enactment_blocked

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
reasonYesShort machine-friendly cause, e.g. 'linkedin_disconnected', 'unreachable_profile', 'no_valid_recipient'.
node_idYesThe flow node whose step could not be performed — must be the node the prospect currently rests on.
agent_idYesID of the agent whose flow the prospect is on.
prospect_idYesThe prospect's `id` — the outreach_prospects primary key, as returned on every query_prospects row and carried on flow on_enter events (event['prospect_ids']).
on_behalf_ofNoAn agency client's email, from list_agency_clients, to run this call in that client's account: their agents, settings, connected accounts, and credits. Omit it to act on your own account.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / on_behalf_of
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "An agency client's email, from list_agency_clients, to run this call in that client's account: their agents, settings, connected accounts, and credits. Omit it to act on your own account."
+}
  2. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / agent_id
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "ID of the agent whose flow the prospect is on.",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / task_id
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "ID of the task whose flow the prospect is on.",
-  "type": "integer"
-}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "task_id",
-  "prospect_id",
-  "node_id",
-  "reason"
-]New value: +[
+  "agent_id",
+  "prospect_id",
+  "node_id",
+  "reason"
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false; the description goes beyond them by explaining the mutation precisely — the block is scoped to the current node, it stops re-dispatch of that step, and any later move onto another node clears the block (consistent with non-destructive). It does not discuss permissions or limits, so it is not fully exhaustive.

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?

Front-loaded summary states the action and the effect, followed by a compact returns block. The tag-based structure is efficient, though the returns sentence is thin enough to feel like filler rather than substance.

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?

With no output schema, the returns block covers the response shape (prospect, node, recorded reason), and the description covers trigger, side effect, reversibility, and the mandatory-call rule. Nothing an agent needs in order to call this correctly 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 description coverage is 100%, so every parameter including reason, node_id, and on_behalf_of is already documented. The description only restates node scoping and the reason categories, adding essentially no syntax or format detail beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

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+resource (report a flow step that could not be performed) and the exact side effect (marks the prospect blocked on the node they rest on). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like retry_blocked_enactment and move_prospect_to_node without opening either schema.

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 a strong usage trigger: 'Call this for every prospect you cannot enqueue or route during a flow step — never silently skip one,' plus the diagnostic criterion 'retrying identically would fail identically' that separates this from a transient failure. It never explicitly names the alternative (retry_blocked_enactment / move_prospect_to_node), so it stops short of a 5.

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

All Sliq 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