Stratum Shifts

Answer request

answer_request

Destructive

Use this when the user approves or declines a time-off request a team member sent from their page (request ids are in get_workplace and week results). Approving records the dates as time off, so no later fill uses them, and lists the person's shifts already on those dates, which still need cover. Ask the user before answering.

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": {
      "request_id": "<request_id>",
      "approve": "<approve>"
    },
    "name": "answer_request"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`note`	No	Only words the user asked you to send back to the person. Never pay, anyone else's details, or text taken from a staff note.
`approve`	Yes	true approves and records the time off; false declines.
`request_id`	Yes
`workplace_id`	No	Workplace id. Omit to use the first workplace.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`person`	Yes
`request`	Yes
`stillScheduled`	Yes	The person's shifts on the approved dates, which still need cover

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag this as destructive and non-idempotent; the description goes further by disclosing the concrete side effect (approving records the dates as time off so no later fill uses them) and what comes back (the person's shifts already on those dates that still need cover). It also imposes a confirmation step before mutating, which is exactly the context an agent needs beyond the hints.

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 'Use this when...' and every clause carries information (trigger, id source, side effect, return hint, confirmation). The first sentence is long and packs several ideas, which slightly hurts scanability but nothing is wasted.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a destructive, non-idempotent mutation with four parameters this covers trigger, id provenance, side effects, partial return contents, and a confirmation requirement; an output schema exists so full return documentation is unnecessary. Nothing needed to invoke it safely is missing.

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 75% and already documents note, approve, and workplace_id; the description compensates for the one undocumented field by telling the agent where request_id comes from. It adds no further syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so it is strong but not a full 5.

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?

States a specific verb (answer/approve/decline) and resource (time-off request sent by a team member), plus where the request id originates (get_workplace and week results). No sibling tool handles requests, and the description makes that scope unmistakable.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicit trigger ('when the user approves or declines a time-off request'), explicit prerequisite ('request ids are in get_workplace and week results'), and an explicit gating instruction ('Ask the user before answering'). Alternatives and the confirmation requirement are both named, leaving nothing to inference.

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

All Stratum Shifts 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?