Crank Protocol

get_intent_status

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read the persisted lifecycle state of an execution intent (free read).

Returns the server-persisted state only -- CREATED, APPROVED, SUBMITTED, UNKNOWN, CONFIRMED, FAILED, or EXPIRED -- plus the simulation summary and the on-chain signature once submitted. Never infers: UNKNOWN means an unresolved send (may have landed); only CONFIRMED is a verified on-chain success (fail-closed reporting, docs/CRANK_PLUGIN_SPEC.md section 6).

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": {
      "intent_id": "<intent_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_intent_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`caller_id`	No
`intent_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedJul 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond the annotations, such as 'Never infers', the fail-closed reporting approach, and the specific meaning of UNKNOWN and CONFIRMED. This aligns with and enhances the readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint annotations.

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?

The description is concise, consisting of two sentences that front-load the purpose and then provide essential behavioral details. Every sentence adds value without unnecessary words.

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?

Given that an output schema exists, the description appropriately focuses on what the tool does and the semantics of the returned states rather than repeating return value details. The behavioral explanations make the tool's usage complete for an agent.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, and the description provides no additional meaning or guidance about the parameters (intent_id and caller_id). As a result, the agent must rely solely on the schema types and defaults, which is insufficient.

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 explicitly states 'Read the persisted lifecycle state of an execution intent (free read)' and lists all possible states, clearly defining the tool's purpose. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_execution_intent by emphasizing its read-only nature and specific state semantics.

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?

The description provides clear context on when to use the tool (for reading lifecycle state) and clarifies the meaning of ambiguous states (UNKNOWN vs CONFIRMED), but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or offer alternative tools.

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

All Crank Protocol tools Inspect

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

Need Help?