Skip to main content
Glama

HALLUX

by dev.blvkware
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Be told if a name turns hostile later

hallux_watch

Register identifiers for notification when their verdict changes. The transition that matters is phantom to squat: a name models invent that somebody then registers.

Use this for a dependency that came back absent or phantom and that the user intends to use anyway, or for a set of dependencies worth monitoring. Delivered by signed webhook to a URL you supply.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
callbackUrlYesAn https URL to POST transitions to.
identifiersYesUp to 100 identifiers to watch, typically ones that came back absent or phantom.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
eventNo
decisionYes
signatureNo
registeredYes
transitionOfInterestNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / identifiers / description
      Added value: +"Up to 100 identifiers to watch, typically ones that came back absent or phantom."
    • addedInput schema / properties / identifiers / items / properties / namespace / description
      Added value: +"Where the identifier lives: pkg.npm, pkg.pypi, pkg.crates, pkg.go, pkg.maven or pkg.nuget for a package, cite.doi for a DOI."
    • addedInput schema / properties / identifiers / items / properties / value / description
      Added value: +"The identifier exactly as written, e.g. requests, @types/node, github.com/spf13/cobra, 10.1038/nature12373."
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "decision": {
+      "enum": [
+        "WATCHING"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "event": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "registered": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "namespace": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "reason": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "signingSecret": {
+            "description": "Verifies the webhook signature.",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "value": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "watchId": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "watched": {
+            "type": "boolean"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "namespace",
+          "value",
+          "watched"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "signature": {
+      "properties": {
+        "format": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "header": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "transitionOfInterest": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "decision",
+    "registered"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations cover the mutation profile, so the description only needs to add context beyond that. It does: the meaningful transition is 'phantom to squat' and notifications are 'Delivered by signed webhook to a URL you supply.' It does not discuss duplicate registrations, but that is not necessary for a first call.

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?

Three short sentences front-load the core action, then provide a concrete use case, then the delivery mechanism. There is no filler, and the description earns each sentence.

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?

The description plus schema cover what the tool does, when to use it, what the identifiers look like, and how delivery happens. Since an output schema exists, explaining return values is unnecessary. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 coverage is 100% and both parameters are well defined in the schema: identifiers as up to 100 namespace/value objects, callbackUrl as an https POST target. The description adds no new parameter-level detail beyond restating that identifiers are typically absent/phantom dependencies, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Register identifiers for notification when their verdict changes' — a specific verb, object, and outcome. It is clearly the monitoring counterpart to the one-shot hallux_check sibling tools, so the agent can distinguish it without opening schemas.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It gives an explicit trigger: 'Use this for a dependency that came back absent or phantom and that the user intends to use anyway, or for a set of dependencies worth monitoring.' It does not explicitly name hallux_check as the alternative or state a when-not condition, but the intended scenario is concrete.

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

All HALLUX toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources