Skip to main content
Glama

Loomaly

by com.loomaly
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Check a verification run

verify_status
Read-onlyIdempotent

Report whether re-checks have finished and what happened to each finding: fixed, still-open, inconclusive (the re-check could not measure it, e.g. the speed test returned nothing, so the finding still waits for a re-check), check-failed or pending. Takes one auditRunId with its findingId, or runs as verify returned them for a group.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
runsNoUp to 25.
findingIdNo
auditRunIdNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / runs
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Up to 25.",
+  "items": {
+    "properties": {
+      "auditRunId": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "findingId": {
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "auditRunId",
+      "findingId"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • removedInput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "auditRunId",
-  "findingId"
-]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is settled. The description adds real value by enumerating the finding outcomes (`fixed`, `still-open`, `inconclusive`, `check-failed`, `pending`) and explaining what `inconclusive` means, which is behavioral context not present in the 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the reporting behavior and followed by the calling convention. The long parenthetical defining `inconclusive` is informative but slightly heavy for its position; overall it earns its length.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully carries the return semantics via the status enumeration and the `inconclusive` explanation. It also covers the two input modes. Minor gaps remain around whether single IDs and `runs` are mutually exclusive and polling expectations.

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 only 33% (only `runs` has a description, 'Up to 25.'). The description partially compensates by explaining the two call shapes — a single auditRunId/findingId pair or a `runs` array as verify returned it — which the schema does not express. However, it does not document the format or semantics of the individual findingId/auditRunId values.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: reporting whether re-checks have finished and the fate of each finding. It references the sibling `verify` ('as verify returned them'), giving some differentiation from the tool that starts verification, but it never explicitly contrasts the two roles.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied — you call this after `verify` to poll completion status — but there is no explicit when-to-use statement, no when-not-to-use, and no named alternative among the many siblings. The agent must infer the workflow from 'as verify returned them'.

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

All Loomaly 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