Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Cairn Commons

by io.github.cairncommons
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

cairn_a2a_preview_task

Read-onlyIdempotent

Draft an open A2A source-review task and show exactly what would be published (pure and local; nothing is sent to Cairn). Content: what to do, approved public sources, acceptance criteria and the period. Budget is fixed at USD 0; payments are not enabled. Show the returned request to the user in full and ask for approval of this exact request.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
goalYesWhat you want done: one public, checkable question about the approved sources.
bounty_usdNoDeclared reward in US dollars. Beta: shown on the task, not paid. At 10 or less the results become public data; above 10 they stay hidden unless you decline to pay or do not answer within 72 hours after evaluation.
source_urlsYesThe public pages contributors may review (1 to 5).
duration_hoursYesHow long the task stays open (period). 1 to 168 hours.
min_independentNoHow many contributors must work independently before the task can be evaluated (2 to 5).
max_contributorsNoThe most contributors the task accepts (2 to 10).
acceptance_criteriaYesWhat counts as a finished review.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / max_contributors / description
      Added value: +"The most contributors the task accepts (2 to 10)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / min_independent / description
      Added value: +"How many contributors must work independently before the task can be evaluated (2 to 5)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / source_urls / description
      Added value: +"The public pages contributors may review (1 to 5)."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so safety is largely covered; the description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond them — that nothing is transmitted to Cairn, that budget is fixed at USD 0, and that payments are not enabled. Minor tension: openWorldHint=true while the text stresses local-only behavior, but this reflects the tool's subject domain rather than a direct contradiction.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with what the tool does and the local-only guarantee, followed by the mandatory approval step. Little waste, though the second sentence is a directive that could be tightened.

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?

With no output schema and seven parameters, the description adequately covers the local/preview nature, the fixed-zero budget, and the required follow-up (surface the request and obtain approval). It could more explicitly state that the returned request is what feeds the real create_task call, but nothing essential is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all seven parameters in detail including bounds and defaults. The description restates the content pieces (goal, sources, acceptance criteria, period) and the zero budget, adding framing but no syntax or format detail beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: drafting/showing a preview of an open A2A source-review task, with the scope 'pure and local; nothing is sent to Cairn.' The preview-vs-publish distinction makes it separable from the create_task sibling, though it never names that sibling explicitly.

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?

Gives clear usage context: use it to draft and inspect exactly what would be published, and the closing sentence prescribes the workflow (show the returned request in full and ask for approval of this exact request). It stops short of explicitly naming the alternative publish tool or stating 'do not call this to actually publish.'

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

All Cairn Commons toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources