Radar noEixo

Create process template

create_process_template

Cria um template de processo (checklist reutilizável). Os steps são um array de objetos {title, description, order, dias, responsavel_id}. dias = prazo da etapa; o prazo total do processo é a soma. Ao abrir um processo, cada etapa conta a partir de quando a anterior foi concluída. agente_id (opcional, vários agentes): enquanto o contato tiver um processo deste template em andamento, a mensagem dele vai para esse agente.

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": {
      "name": "<name>",
      "steps": "<steps>"
    },
    "name": "create_process_template"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes	Nome do template (ex: "Onboarding de Cliente Novo")
`steps`	Yes	Passos do checklist
`agente_id`	No	Quem atende na conversa (id de list_agent_profiles). Omitido = agente de entrada do número, como sempre.
`description`	No	Descrição do template (opcional)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 8, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / agente_id

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Quem atende na conversa (id de list_agent_profiles). Omitido = agente de entrada do número, como sempre.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

Changed2 schema fields changedNov 7, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / steps / items / properties / dias

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Dias para concluir a etapa (1–365). A data conta a partir de quando a anterior foi concluída. Omitido = sem prazo.",
+  "type": "number"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / steps / items / properties / responsavel_id

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Quem responde pela etapa (id de list_team_permissions). Recebe o aviso das 8h quando ela atrasa.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedOct 26, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false). The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: the total process deadline is the sum of step dias, each step's clock starts when the previous one was completed, and agente_id reroutes inbound messages while a process from this template is in progress. It does not mention validation failure behavior or whether templates can later be edited.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose, then the steps shape, then the two behavioral rules. Dense but every sentence carries semantics; the only redundancy is re-explaining dias, which the schema already covers.

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 creation tool with full schema coverage, no output schema, and a clear annotation profile, the description supplies the timing and message-routing consequences an agent needs. Remaining gaps (error handling, editability of created templates) are minor for a create operation.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so a 3 is the baseline. The description earns a point by adding a rule absent from the schema: the total process deadline equals the sum of step dias. It also restates the dias and agente_id semantics that the schema already documents, which is redundant but not harmful.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Cria um template de processo") and immediately glosses it as a reusable checklist, which distinguishes a template from the instance-creating sibling create_process. It never names that sibling explicitly, so the differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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 only implied: the description explains how a template behaves once a process is opened, which hints at when to create one, but there is no explicit when-to-use, no prerequisite, and no routing away from create_process or list_process_templates. The agent must infer the choice from context.

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

All Radar noEixo 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?