Skip to main content
Glama

Hatch

by com.viberooster
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Await human decision

await_decision

Create a human-in-the-loop review on the live artifact. Default options: Approve / Request changes / Reject. Reviewers see a Review required chip → modal. Request changes is non-terminal: webhook or poll returns changes_requested, then call continue_decision after regenerating. Optional timeoutSeconds and maxIterations (default 5). If the page has interactive controls (sliders/forms), the hatch HTML MUST expose window.VR_HITL_GET_SETTINGS so the review can attach those assumptions as JSON. When the user integrates n8n, Temporal, CI, or any external workflow, pass webhookUrl (MCP opens the review; the platform POSTs each transition to that URL — prefer webhook over poll_decision for automation). See PARTNER-WEBHOOKS.md for event payloads.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleNoModal heading (default: Finish your review).
policyNoPolicy override when hatch has none set (idempotent with auto-opened HITL).
hatchIdNoHatch id from the original hatch response.
optionsNoRadio choices (default Approve, Request changes, Reject). Labels are classified into approve / reject / changes_requested.
tenantIdNoLegacy alias for `hatchId`.
contextUrlNo
webhookUrlNoHTTPS URL that receives a POST on every HITL transition (decision.resolved, decision.changes_requested, timeout, superseded, etc.). Prefer this over poll_decision when wiring n8n, Temporal, or other automation — MCP creates the review; the webhook delivers the outcome. Full payload: PARTNER-WEBHOOKS.md.
agentOutputNoOptional seed of the agent’s current output into the conversation transcript.
sessionTokenNo
maxIterationsNoMax review rounds (default 5). Requesting changes at the last iteration fails with max_iterations_exceeded.
timeoutSecondsNoWall-clock timeout for this review round; omit for no timeout.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / policy
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Policy override when hatch has none set (idempotent with auto-opened HITL).",
+  "enum": [
+    "required",
+    "good_effort"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / webhookUrl / description
      Previous value: -"HTTPS URL that receives a POST on every HITL transition (decision.resolved, decision.changes_requested, timeout, etc.). Prefer this over poll_decision when wiring n8n, Temporal, or other automation — MCP creates the review; the webhook delivers the outcome. Full payload: PARTNER-WEBHOOKS.md."New value: +"HTTPS URL that receives a POST on every HITL transition (decision.resolved, decision.changes_requested, timeout, superseded, etc.). Prefer this over poll_decision when wiring n8n, Temporal, or other automation — MCP creates the review; the webhook delivers the outcome. Full payload: PARTNER-WEBHOOKS.md."
  2. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / hatchId
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Hatch id from the original hatch response.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / tenantId / description
      Added value: +"Legacy alias for `hatchId`."
    • removedInput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "tenantId"
-]
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / webhookUrl / description
      Previous value: -"Optional POST callback on each status transition."New value: +"HTTPS URL that receives a POST on every HITL transition (decision.resolved, decision.changes_requested, timeout, etc.). Prefer this over poll_decision when wiring n8n, Temporal, or other automation — MCP creates the review; the webhook delivers the outcome. Full payload: PARTNER-WEBHOOKS.md."
  4. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations are minimal, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It adds key behaviors: changes_requested is non-terminal, timeout/maxIterations semantics, the requirement for window.__VR_HITL_GET_SETTINGS__ on interactive pages, and webhook POST behavior on every transition.

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 description is dense and front-loaded with the core action, then progresses through behavioral nuances and integration guidance. Every sentence adds information, though the length is justified by the tool's complexity. A slightly tighter arrangement of external-workflow details would raise it to 5.

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 an 11-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the full lifecycle, defaults, failure modes, and external integration, and even points to PARTNER-WEBHOOKS.md for payload details. The interactive-controls requirement addresses a critical edge case. Nothing essential 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 82%, so the schema already documents most parameters. The description adds value beyond the schema for webhookUrl (prefer over poll_decision, receives POST on every transition), maxIterations (default and failure at last iteration), and options (classification into approve/reject/changes_requested).

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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Create a human-in-the-loop review on the live artifact.' It goes on to detail default options and the review lifecycle, which clearly distinguishes it from siblings like poll_decision and continue_decision.

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 guidance is given for selecting alternatives: 'prefer webhook over poll_decision for automation' and 'then call continue_decision after regenerating' when changes are requested. It also specifies when to pass webhookUrl for external workflows, leaving no ambiguity about when to use this tool versus its siblings.

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

All Hatch 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