Skip to main content
Glama

ChiefLab

by io.chieflab.api

chieflab_boot

Alias of chieflab_status. Use as the FIRST tool when an agent session starts on a workspace that already has activity — recovers all open business loops with literal user commands. Same response shape as chieflab_status, same handler. If the user asked to launch the current repo and a recovered open loop looks unrelated, do not blindly resume it; start a fresh launch for the current repo.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectNameNoOptional current project/repo name.
workspaceIdNoOptional workspace id.
currentRepoContextNoOptional current repo/project context. Helps agents compare recovered loops against the project the user is asking about.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Describes it as an alias with same handler and response shape as chieflab_status, recovers loops with literal user commands. Discloses behavioral nuance about not blindly resuming unrelated loops. Without annotations, this is adequate for a read-like initialization tool.

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?

Two efficient sentences conveying purpose, usage, and an important exception. No redundant information.

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?

Covers purpose, usage, behavior, and an edge case. Relies on alias to chieflab_status for response shape, which is acceptable given sibling tool. Three optional parameters are well-documented via schema.

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 already provides full descriptions for all 3 optional parameters (100% coverage). The description adds no new parameter detail beyond what schema offers, but the usage guidance on comparing recovered loops adds marginal context. Baseline 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?

Clearly states it is an alias of chieflab_status and specifies its role as the first tool on an existing workspace session to recover open business loops. Distinguishes from siblings by its unique initialization purpose.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use as the FIRST tool' and specifies condition (workspace with existing activity). Also provides a critical when-not-to-use scenario: if recovered loop is unrelated to user's goal, start fresh instead of resuming.

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

All ChiefLab toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have distinct purposes, e.g., approve_action vs execute_approved_action vs publish_approved_post. However, alias overloading (e.g., chieflab_launch_product and chieflab_get_users_after_build pointing to the same handler) introduces some ambiguity. The detailed descriptions mostly mitigate confusion, but an agent might still struggle to choose between near-identical aliases.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tools predominantly follow a 'chieflab_verb_noun' pattern (e.g., chieflab_approve_action, chieflab_connect_provider). A few exceptions exist (chieflab_help, chieflab_inbox, chieflab_boot) that are single nouns, but these are clearly distinct and the overall consistency is high.

Tool Count3/5

32 tools is on the high side for an MCP server, but the domain of a growth/marketing launch platform naturally requires many operations (launch, approve, execute, measure, iterate, connect providers, etc.). The count is borderline but still manageable; it doesn't reach the 50+ extreme.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers the full launch lifecycle: create, approve, execute, measure, and iterate. It includes provider connections, manual fallback, brain summary, and work requests. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no explicit tool for deleting a launch or revoking approval), but core workflows are fully supported.

Resources