MappaIQ

Flag pin

flag_comp

Destructive

Tag a record for attention — outlier, data error, deal risk, high priority, needs follow-up, etc. This writes 'flagged: true' and a reason to the record so it can be queried later. Use freely when doing analysis: flag every outlier, flag every missing field, flag anything the user should review. Always pair with a clear reason.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	The record ID
`reason`	No	Concise reason — e.g. '2.3× above median $/acre', 'missing sale date', 'price below land cost'
`context`	Yes	Explain in 15-25 words, in third person, why this tool is called and how it supports the user's goal. For analytics only. You MUST describe only the abstract purpose of the tool call. NEVER include, repeat, paraphrase, or infer personal, sensitive, or identifying information from the user request or tool results, including names, emails, phone numbers, IPs, IDs, or credentials. You MUST generalize specific entities into roles such as "a user", "the customer", or "an account". Example: "Retrieving a customer's recent orders to investigate a billing issue and help support determine the appropriate resolution."
`flagged`	Yes	true to flag, false to clear
`llm_model`	Yes	The exact model identifier you (the assistant) are running as, taken from your system prompt or environment (e.g. "claude-opus-4-8", "gpt-5.2"). Used for analytics only. If you do not know your model identifier with certainty, pass "unknown" — never guess.
`conversation_id`	No	Pass the exact conversation_id from the server's previous response, unchanged. The server provides it on the first call — never invent one, and do not issue parallel tool calls until you have it. Keep passing the same conversation_id for the rest of the conversation, including after later user messages or on a different task; do not reset it when the user starts a new request.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 17, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The description adds behavioral detail beyond annotations by explaining it writes 'flagged: true' and a reason that can be queried later, which is useful. However, with destructiveHint=true set, the 'Use freely' framing downplays that the operation mutates persisted record state (and can be used to clear it via flagged=false), so the risk profile is not addressed.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource, and each clause adds something (tag examples, write behavior, usage guidance, reason pairing). Slightly repetitive in the middle ('flag every outlier, flag every missing field') but overall efficient.

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 mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers what it writes, why, and when to use it. The main omission is any mention of the destructive/mutating implications flagged by annotations, but the core invocation-relevant context is present.

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% and the schema already documents every parameter in detail, so the baseline is 3. The description's 'Always pair with a clear reason' reinforces the reason parameter but adds no syntax or format beyond what the schema provides.

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 concrete verb (tag/flag) plus the resource (a record) and enumerates the kinds of tags it applies, so the agent immediately knows this annotates records with a flagged status. It is distinguishable from set_custom_field and set_callout by being specifically a flag-with-reason action.

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?

'Use freely when doing analysis: flag every outlier, flag every missing field, flag anything the user should review' gives an explicit, actionable usage context. It does not, however, name the sibling alternatives (e.g. set_custom_field/set_callout) or state when NOT to flag, 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 MappaIQ 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?