Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Privatrak

by com.privatrak
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Resolve a click problem

resolve_click_problem
Destructive

Mark a click problem fixed, once you have fixed the element in the code. It leaves the default list and comes back by itself as reopened (Happened again) when a dead (No effect) or error (Errors) click on it arrives after now; rage (Repeated clicks) and slow (Slow responses) clicks do not bring it back. On an element already resolved, reopened (Happened again) or ignored it overwrites that and moves the cutoff to now, which hides a Happened again row: only resolve after a real fix. Hides rows only; no count changes. identity: the row's identity from list_click_problems, all five fields exactly as returned (null stays null; a different text or a null for "" is a different element). Pass run_id from start_setup_run so this undoes together with the rest of the setup; leave it out (never "") to start a new chat run, whose run_id is returned and should go on every later change.

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": {
      "identity": "<identity>"
    },
    "name": "resolve_click_problem"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
run_idNoThe setup run this change belongs to, from start_setup_run. Omit to start a new chat run (its id is returned).
projectNoProject ID, from list_projects. Required when this connection covers more than one project; may be left out when it covers one (and with an API key, which belongs to one project).
identityYesThe row's identity object from list_click_problems (default grouping), all five fields exactly as returned, null where it is null.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Despite annotations already covering the safety profile (destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false), the description adds substantial context the annotations cannot: the reopen-on-new-dead-or-error-click lifecycle, that it overwrites an existing resolved/reopened/ignored state and moves the cutoff to now, and that it hides rows without changing counts. This is exactly the kind of mutation consequence an agent needs.

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 core action and its caution are front-loaded, and the parentheticals ('Happened again', 'No effect') add precision rather than noise. It is dense with run-on sentences, but nearly every clause carries distinct behavioral meaning.

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 nested-identity mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the lifecycle, the identity matching rules, and run_id grouping thoroughly. The only omission is any mention of the project parameter, which the 100%-covered schema already documents adequately.

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 the baseline is 3, but the description goes beyond it by defining identity matching semantics ('a different text or a null for "" is a different element') and run_id behavior (pass from start_setup_run to undo together; omit, never "", to start a new chat run whose id must go on every later change).

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 ('Mark a click problem fixed') and immediately qualifies it with the precondition 'once you have fixed the element in the code'. It clearly distinguishes the resolved state from the reopened/ignored states in later sentences, though it never names ignore_click_problem or reopen_click_problem as explicit alternatives.

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?

Gives a direct when-to-use rule ('only resolve after a real fix') and explains the consequence of misuse (a Happened again row gets hidden). It also implies the boundaries against rage and slow clicks. It stops short of explicitly routing the agent to the sibling tools for those other cases.

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

All Privatrak 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