Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

EXZA Remote

by de.exza.remote
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Update task progress

exza_update_task_progress
Destructive

Update the task-progress display in the connected EXZA terminal. The title identifies the user task; optional id correlates later updates; status is planned, running, completed or failed; details adds the visible status explanation. This changes only terminal progress metadata, never executes a command, ends a job, edits project files or approves computer access. Use exza_start_background_job to actually launch background work, and exza_get_background_job_status to monitor execution. Requires the account-bound device and computer:write authorization.

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": {
      "title": "<title>",
      "status": "<status>"
    },
    "name": "exza_update_task_progress"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoIdentifier returned by the corresponding start/list operation; not a device PIN.
titleYesUser-requested task title shown in terminal progress.
statusYesTask status selected from the enumerated lifecycle values.
detailsNoShort user-visible task status details, without credentials.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, it discloses the precise blast radius of the mutation ("changes only terminal progress metadata"), the authorization requirement ("account-bound device and computer:write authorization"), and the operations it does not perform. The declared destructiveHint=true is broad but not contradicted, since the description does describe a state-changing write that is scoped to progress metadata.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with the primary action before the field explanations and exclusions. The negative-effect list is long but earns its place by preventing the most likely misselection; a small amount of the field-by-field walkthrough duplicates the schema.

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?

No output schema exists, yet the description makes the outcome legible: only terminal progress metadata changes and nothing else runs. With four fully documented parameters and an explicit auth requirement, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly.

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; the description still adds value by explaining roles rather than restating names — title identifies the user task, id "correlates later updates," and details is the "visible status explanation." It does not restate the enum values beyond listing them, which the schema already supplies.

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 first sentence names a specific verb and resource ("Update the task-progress display in the connected EXZA terminal") and the body enumerates exactly which fields change (title, id, status, details). It is clearly separable from siblings such as exza_start_background_job and exza_get_background_job_status, which it explicitly names.

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?

The description states the negative case plainly ("never executes a command, ends a job, edits project files or approves computer access") and routes the agent to the correct alternatives: exza_start_background_job to launch work and exza_get_background_job_status to monitor execution. That is explicit when-to-use, when-not, and named alternatives.

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

All EXZA Remote 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