Skip to main content
Glama

Reconstruct

by dev.reconstruct
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Wait for product request

wait_product_request
Read-only

Wait up to 30 seconds for your request status to change. Pass progressStatus from the last result as knownStatus to follow verification and capture progress. Polls fresh repository data every two seconds; returns changed, terminal and timedOut plus request. Completed, failed, canceled and rejected are terminal. Legacy pending/approved/rejected values retain review-only waiting. Capture progress is exposed without job IDs. Repeat after timeout while the user wants to wait; do not resubmit the request.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
requestIdYesUUID returned by create_product_request or list_product_requests. The request must be visible in the selected scope.
knownStatusYesprogressStatus from the previous request result. Legacy pending, approved and rejected values wait on review status only.
waitSecondsNoMaximum wait duration in seconds, clamped to 0..30; default 20. Zero performs one immediate status check.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYesOwner request polling result

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / knownStatus / description
      Added value: +"progressStatus from the previous request result. Legacy pending, approved and rejected values wait on review status only."
    • addedInput schema / properties / requestId / description
      Added value: +"UUID returned by create_product_request or list_product_requests. The request must be visible in the selected scope."
    • addedInput schema / properties / waitSeconds / description
      Added value: +"Maximum wait duration in seconds, clamped to 0..30; default 20. Zero performs one immediate status check."
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$defs": {
+    "privateRequest": {
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "description": "Authenticated owner request including review and capture progress",
+      "properties": {
+        "createdAt": {
+          "description": "ISO-8601 timestamp",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "history": {
+          "description": "Result entries",
+          "items": {
+            "$ref": "#/$defs/requestHistory"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        "jobStatus": {
+          "description": "jobStatus",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "payloadJson": {
+          "description": "payloadJson",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "product": {
+          "description": "product",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "progressStatus": {
+          "description": "progressStatus",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "requestId": {
+          "description": "requestId",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "requestType": {
+          "description": "requestType",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "reviewedAt": {
+          "anyOf": [
+            {
+              "description": "ISO-8601 timestamp",
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            {
+              "type": "null"
+            }
+          ]
+        },
+        "safetyStatus": {
+          "description": "safetyStatus",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "status": {
+          "description": "status",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "subject": {
+          "description": "subject",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "url": {
+          "description": "url",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "workflowStatus": {
+          "description": "workflowStatus",
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "requestId",
+        "requestType",
+        "product",
+        "subject",
+        "url",
+        "status",
+        "payloadJson",
+        "createdAt",
+        "history",
+        "safetyStatus",
+        "workflowStatus",
+        "jobStatus",
+        "progressStatus",
+        "reviewedAt"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "requestHistory": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "description": "Public workflow transition",
+      "properties": {
+        "actor": {
+          "description": "actor",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "at": {
+          "description": "ISO-8601 timestamp",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "reason": {
+          "description": "reason",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "status": {
+          "description": "status",
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "status",
+        "reason",
+        "actor",
+        "at"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "description": "Structured result. Existing text or image content remains available in content.",
+  "properties": {
+    "result": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "description": "Owner request polling result",
+      "properties": {
+        "changed": {
+          "description": "Whether this condition holds",
+          "type": "boolean"
+        },
+        "request": {
+          "$ref": "#/$defs/privateRequest"
+        },
+        "terminal": {
+          "description": "Whether this condition holds",
+          "type": "boolean"
+        },
+        "timedOut": {
+          "description": "Whether this condition holds",
+          "type": "boolean"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "request",
+        "changed",
+        "terminal",
+        "timedOut"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "result"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With only readOnlyHint=true provided, the description carries real behavioral load: 2-second polling interval, 30s cap, which states are terminal (completed/failed/canceled/rejected), legacy pending/approved/rejected semantics, and that capture progress is exposed without job IDs. The one weak spot is that 'returns changed, terminal and timedOut plus request' partly restates the output schema rather than adding new behavior.

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-loads the core purpose and duration, then proceeds to mechanics. Dense but each sentence adds operational value; it is slightly packed with several clauses but not redundant.

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?

Output schema exists so return structure needn't be spelled out, and the description nonetheless covers timeout, polling cadence, terminal states, and legacy handling. Complete enough for correct invocation; only the absence of explicit sibling routing keeps it from a 5.

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%, so all three parameters and their defaults are already documented, giving a baseline of 3. The description reinforces knownStatus semantics (progressStatus from last result, legacy values) but adds little syntax or meaning beyond what the schema already states.

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 (wait) plus resource (product request) and defines the scope precisely with a 30-second cap. It also implicitly separates itself from create_product_request ('do not resubmit the request') and from a plain status getter. An agent can distinguish it from get_product_request/list_product_requests without opening a schema.

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?

Provides clear context: pass progressStatus as knownStatus, repeat after timeout while the user wants to wait, and do not resubmit. This is actionable when-to-use guidance. It stops short of explicitly naming get_product_request as the non-blocking alternative, so it's clear but not fully comparative.

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

All Reconstruct 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