Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

TestGraph

by io.github.BBCBasic
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Resolve a contested location assertion

resolve_location_assertion
Idempotent

Accept or reject a contested location assertion. The submitting client cannot resolve its own contested claim without explicit user approval.

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": {
      "assertion_id": "<assertion_id>",
      "decision": "<decision>",
      "rationale": "<rationale>",
      "idempotency_key": "<idempotency_key>"
    },
    "name": "resolve_location_assertion"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
decisionYes
rationaleYes
assertion_idYes
user_approvedNo
idempotency_keyYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / version_check
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Required live deployment token. Call get_server_info immediately before this write and pass write_version_token unchanged. Stale or missing tokens are rejected before any write occurs.",
-  "maxLength": 64,
-  "minLength": 64,
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "assertion_id",
-  "decision",
-  "rationale",
-  "idempotency_key",
-  "version_check"
-]New value: +[
+  "assertion_id",
+  "decision",
+  "rationale",
+  "idempotency_key"
+]
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / version_check
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Required live deployment token. Call get_server_info immediately before this write and pass write_version_token unchanged. Stale or missing tokens are rejected before any write occurs.",
+  "maxLength": 64,
+  "minLength": 64,
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "assertion_id",
-  "decision",
-  "rationale",
-  "idempotency_key"
-]New value: +[
+  "assertion_id",
+  "decision",
+  "rationale",
+  "idempotency_key",
+  "version_check"
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark the operation as non-read-only, non-destructive, and idempotent. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by explaining that the submitting client cannot resolve its own contested claim without explicit user approval, which clarifies the approval requirement beyond the schema's user_approved default.

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 concise sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the added approval constraint earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a mutating tool with no output schema and zero parameter coverage, the description is too thin. It captures the approval prerequisite but does not explain the workflow around contested assertions, the role of idempotency, or how a caller should obtain the assertion_id and what happens after resolution.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It only indirectly explains 'decision' ('accept or reject') and hints at 'user_approved' (explicit user approval), but it does not add meaning for assertion_id, rationale, or idempotency_key, leaving most parameters semantically under-specified.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific action ('Accept or reject') on a specific resource ('a contested location assertion'), and the title reinforces it. It is clear enough to distinguish from most siblings, though it does not explicitly differentiate from similar resolution tools like record_resolution.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies when to use the tool: when a location assertion is contested and the submitting client needs explicit user approval to resolve it. However, it does not state when not to use it or name alternative tools, leaving some selection ambiguity against siblings.

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

All TestGraph 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