Sergio by Serviche

Create a Scanner

create_scanner

Idempotent

Saves a new Scanner, as Save on New Scanner does: question (required), and optionally name, inputs, look-again timing, who gets the task, due rule, destination, contact types, and enabled (on or off; there is no trial mode). Pass the same idempotency_key when retrying. An owner-level change: Sergio tells the owner after it is made.

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": {
      "question": "<question>",
      "idempotency_key": "<idempotency_key>"
    },
    "name": "create_scanner"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No
`draft`	No
`inputs`	No
`reason`	No	Why you are doing this, in one sentence. The owner sees it in the notice Sergio sends after the change.
`rollup`	No
`enabled`	No
`due_rule`	No
`question`	Yes
`due_hours`	No
`destination`	No
`refinements`	No
`assignee_kind`	No
`contact_types`	No
`idempotency_key`	Yes	Your id for this operation (8-128 of A-Z a-z 0-9 . _ : -). Reuse it on every retry of the same operation; use a new one for a new operation.
`look_again_kind`	No
`assignee_member_id`	No
`look_again_minutes`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 8, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover non-readOnly, idempotent and non-destructive, but the description adds genuinely new behavior: there is no trial mode, so enabled is either on or off, the change is owner-level and the owner is notified afterward. It doesn't say what the notice contains or what happens on failure, which keeps it below 5.

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?

One dense but front-loaded passage that opens with the action and the UI equivalent, then lists optional fields, then idempotency, then the side effect. Every clause carries information, though the long field list is harder to scan than a short sentence plus bullets.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a 17-parameter mutation with no output schema and near-zero schema descriptions, three parameters (draft, rollup, refinements) go completely unexplained and the enum values for three fields are never described. The side-effect and retry context is good, but an agent still cannot confidently populate much of the schema from this definition.

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 only 12%, so the description has to compensate. It marks question as required and names most business fields in plain language (name, inputs, look-again timing, assignee, due rule, destination, contact types, enabled), but it omits draft, rollup and refinements entirely and gives no meaning for the due_rule, assignee_kind or look_again_kind enums.

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?

"Saves a new Scanner, as Save on New Scanner does" states a specific verb and resource and anchors it to a known UI action, which separates it from edit_scanner, delete_scanner and set_scanner_on. It doesn't explicitly name those siblings, so it stops short of 5.

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?

The description gives retry guidance ("Pass the same idempotency_key when retrying") and implies this is the creation path, but never states when to use this versus edit_scanner or set_scanner_on, nor any prerequisites such as permissions needed to make an owner-level change.

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

All Sergio by Serviche 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?