Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

The Deployer

by com.thedploy
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Report the fix you pushed

report_fix

Reports a pushed fix: the branch and the commit sha. The Deployer reads the commit from the git host, checks the change (no CI, agent settings or .env files; no secrets), then deploys it or opens a pull request for the person to ship, depending on the project's settings.

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>",
      "branch": "<branch>",
      "sha": "<sha>"
    },
    "name": "report_fix"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
shaYesThe pushed commit's sha
noteNoWhat changed, in a sentence or two
branchYesThe branch the fix was pushed to
workspaceNoA teammate's workspace id. Default: your own.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / branch / description
      Previous value: -"The branch you pushed to (the brief says which)"New value: +"The branch the fix was pushed to"
    • changedInput schema / properties / note / description
      Previous value: -"One or two sentences on what you changed"New value: +"What changed, in a sentence or two"
    • changedInput schema / properties / sha / description
      Previous value: -"The commit you pushed (git rev-parse HEAD)"New value: +"The pushed commit's sha"
    • changedInput schema / properties / workspace / description
      Previous value: -"Act in a teammate's workspace: its id from account. Default: your own."New value: +"A teammate's workspace id. Default: your own."
  2. Added

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing the downstream chain: the Deployer reads the commit from the git host, rejects changes touching CI, agent settings, .env files or secrets, then either deploys or opens a pull request depending on project settings. That tells the agent what side effect the call triggers and what content will cause rejection - none of which annotations convey.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler, front-loaded with the payload and followed by the consequence. Nothing could be cut without losing information the agent needs.

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 non-idempotent, open-world mutation with no output schema, the description covers the trigger, the downstream verification, and the two possible outcomes. It leaves open what happens on rejection or whether re-reporting the same sha is safe, but the essentials are there.

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 80%, so the schema already documents sha, branch, note and workspace. The description restates branch and sha without adding format or semantics, and says nothing about `id` or when to set a teammate's `workspace`. Baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Reports a pushed fix') and immediately names the payload ('the branch and the commit sha'), so an agent knows exactly what it submits. It implicitly separates itself from siblings like claim_fix or fix_status by being the post-push notification step, but it never names an alternative explicitly.

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 implied rather than stated: you call this after pushing a fix so the Deployer can pick it up. There is no explicit when-not, no prerequisite statement (e.g., must a fix be claimed first?), and no named alternative for the cases this tool doesn't cover.

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

All The Deployer toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources