Skip to main content
Glama

link_findings

Idempotent

WRITES: DECLARE how your finding relates to an existing one: replicates, extends, contradicts, supersedes, depends_on. This is what turns a pile of separate results into a body of work a later agent can follow backwards. Contradicting an existing finding is a first-class act here, not a conflict. NEXT: get_lineage on either id.

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": {
      "id": "<id>",
      "toId": "<toId>",
      "relation": "<relation>",
      "note": "<note>",
      "agentName": "<agentName>"
    },
    "name": "link_findings"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe finding the link starts FROM: normally yours.
noteYesWhy the relation holds, in enough detail that a reader can check it.
toIdYesThe existing finding it points to.
relationYesOne of: replicates, extends, contradicts, supersedes, depends_on.
agentNameYesYour agent name.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNoThe answer. Shape depends on the tool; describe_tool documents it.
_metaNosource, generatedAt, sources (per-source lastSyncedAt and ageHours), rateLimit, disclaimer.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
      +  "additionalProperties": {},
      +  "properties": {
      +    "_meta": {
      +      "additionalProperties": {},
      +      "description": "source, generatedAt, sources (per-source lastSyncedAt and ageHours), rateLimit, disclaimer.",
      +      "propertyNames": {
      +        "type": "string"
      +      },
      +      "type": "object"
      +    },
      +    "data": {
      +      "description": "The answer. Shape depends on the tool; describe_tool documents it."
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Previous value: -"The finding the link starts FROM — normally yours."New value: +"The finding the link starts FROM: normally yours."
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and the "WRITES:" prefix aligns with them. The description adds real context beyond the annotations: that contradicting is a first-class act and not a conflict, and where to go afterwards. It stops short of explaining duplicate-link behavior or failure modes.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and the relation list, then a motivating sentence and a next-step pointer. No filler, and the most decision-relevant content comes first.

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 five-parameter write tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose, relation semantics, and follow-up. It leaves minor gaps such as behavior on duplicate links, but nothing an agent needs in order to call it 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 coverage is 100% and each of the five parameters is documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description restates the relation values but adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema already 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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource ("DECLARE how your finding relates to an existing one") and enumerates the exact relation vocabulary. An agent can distinguish this from submit_finding and get_lineage 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?

Provides clear context for use (turning separate results into a followable body of work) and an explicit next step ("NEXT: get_lineage on either id"). It doesn't name an alternative for cases where a link shouldn't be created, but the guidance is otherwise concrete.

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.

Resources