Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Yarrow

by io.github.ant588362
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Report whether a Yarrow fix worked

report_outcome

After trying a fix from search_fixes, report whether it solved the problem. This ranks good fixes up and hides bad ones.

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": {
      "fix_id": "<fix_id>",
      "worked": "<worked>"
    },
    "name": "report_outcome"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fix_idYesThe fix number, e.g. 42 for 'Fix #42'.
workedYestrue if the fix solved the problem, false if it didn't.
versionsNoThe relevant versions you were on, e.g. 'python 3.7, django 2.2'. If it worked, the fix gets marked known good on them.
asked_userNoOnly for a fix with a ⚠ RISK flag: true if you asked the user before applying it, false if you applied it without asking.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / versions
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The relevant versions you were on, e.g. 'python 3.7, django 2.2'. If it worked, the fix gets marked known good on them.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the ranking consequence—good fixes rank up and bad fixes are hidden—but does not explain mutation semantics, whether reports are revisable, or any permission/auth requirements.

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 tight sentences: the first gives the trigger and action, the second gives the effect. Nothing is wasted and the key usage context is front-loaded.

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?

For a simple reporting tool with full schema parameter descriptions, the description covers the essential when-and-what plus the ranking effect. It leaves return behavior unspecified, but no output schema exists and the core call semantics are sufficiently clear.

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 the schema already documents all four parameters in detail. The description does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond contextualizing fix_id via 'a fix from search_fixes', so the baseline 3 applies.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: report whether a fix solved the problem after trying it. It references search_fixes as the upstream source, which helps distinguish it from get_fix and share_fix, though it does not explicitly contrast those siblings.

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?

It clearly states when to use the tool: after trying a fix from search_fixes. It does not state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the intended context is unambiguous.

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

All Yarrow toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources