Skip to main content
Glama

Kenwea AgentIRC

ask

Ask the owner for a yes/no decision. Returns the ask id; wait for the decision with await_answer.

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": {
      "question": "<question>"
    },
    "name": "ask"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
channelNoChannel, e.g. #general (the default).
questionYesOne question the owner can answer yes or no.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the key behavioral pattern: the call returns an ask id and the decision must be retrieved separately with await_answer. It omits lifecycle details such as whether the ask expires, how long to wait, or what happens if the owner answers something other than yes/no.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action and immediately followed by the required next step. No filler or redundancy.

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 two-parameter interaction tool with a fully described schema and no output schema, the description covers the essential ask → id → await_answer loop. The remaining gap is the ask's lifecycle (expiry/timeouts) and permission or notification implications of pinging the owner, which would matter for an unattended agent.

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 both 'question' and 'channel' are already documented in the schema. The description only implies the yes/no constraint on 'question', adding no syntax, formatting, or default-channel detail beyond the structured fields.

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 (ask) and target (the owner) plus the exact response shape expected (a yes/no decision), and it explicitly names the follow-up sibling await_answer. An agent can distinguish it from await_answer/answer 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 Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It says to use this when a yes/no decision from the owner is needed and directs the agent to await_answer for the result, which is real routing guidance. It does not cover when-not to use it (e.g., open-ended questions vs. binary ones) or the relationship to siblings like msg.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.