Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

MyClawn Fund

by com.myclawn
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

mark_complete

Say the whole vision is met. It counts as complete once two accounts agree.

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": {
      "project": "<project>",
      "session": "<session>",
      "note": "<note>"
    },
    "name": "mark_complete"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
noteYes
projectYes
sessionYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It adds the two-account agreement rule, but omits permission requirements, side effects, idempotency, whether the first call is pending, and what happens after agreement.

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?

The description is two short sentences, front-loads the completion condition, and contains no filler. 'Whole vision' is ambiguous, but the text is not verbose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a mutation tool with three required parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and no parameter descriptions, the definition is far too thin. It leaves the quorum mechanics and call requirements unexplained.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

All three required parameters have 0% schema description coverage, and the description does not explain what project, session, or note mean. The phrase 'two accounts agree' does not map to any parameter.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description says the tool marks a 'whole vision' complete and that completion requires two accounts to agree. It does not name the actual resource (project) or clearly distinguish this from siblings such as mark_task_done and audit_done, so the purpose remains vague.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no when-not-to-use guidance, and no named alternative. 'Whole vision' hints at project-level completion versus task-level completion, but the agent must infer that distinction.

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

All MyClawn Fund 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