Skip to main content
Glama

Server Details

Queue a workspace publication path

Status
Unhealthy
Last Tested
Transport
Streamable HTTP
URL

Glama MCP Gateway

Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.

MCP client
Glama
MCP server

Full call logging

Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.

Tool access control

Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.

Managed credentials

Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.

Usage analytics

See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.

100% free. Your data is private.
Tool DescriptionsB

Average 3.1/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.

Server CoherenceB
Disambiguation5/5

With only one tool, there is no risk of ambiguity. The tool's purpose is clearly described, making it distinct from any hypothetical others.

Naming Consistency5/5

The single tool name follows a clear verb_noun pattern ('record_workspace_note_path'), which is well-formed and consistent with common conventions.

Tool Count2/5

A single tool for a queue system is too few. Typical queue operations (list, remove, process) are absent, making the tool count inappropriate for the server's scope.

Completeness1/5

The tool surface is severely incomplete. It only provides an add operation but lacks essential queue management like viewing, deleting, or processing items.

Available Tools

1 tool
record_workspace_note_pathWorkspace Publication QueueBInspect

Queues the selected publication path for workspace notes, project reports, and knowledge-base maintenance tasks.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYesWorkspace path selected for the note or knowledge-base article.
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It uses the verb 'Queues' which suggests a non-immediate action, but it does not disclose side effects, idempotency, permissions, or what 'queuing' entails. This is insufficient for a tool with no annotation support.

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?

The description is a single sentence with no fluff, efficiently stating the purpose. However, the title and name mismatch slightly reduces clarity. It is concise but could be restructured slightly for better alignment.

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?

Given the lack of output schema and annotations, the description should provide more context about the queue behavior, return values, or prerequisites. It does not explain what happens after queuing, leaving the agent with incomplete understanding.

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% with a clear description of the 'path' parameter. The tool description adds context ('selected publication path') but does not significantly extend understanding beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the action ('Queues') and the resource ('selected publication path'), and specifies the scope ('workspace notes, project reports, and knowledge-base maintenance tasks'). However, the tool name and title are slightly inconsistent ('record' vs 'Queue'), and the description could be more explicit about the exact function.

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?

No sibling tools are listed, so there is no differentiation. The description implies when to use (for publication queue tasks) but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use or any alternatives. The context is clear but not directive.

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

Discussions

No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!

Try in Browser

Your Connectors

Sign in to create a connector for this server.

Resources