Skip to main content
Glama

VerifiMind PEAS - RefleXion Trinity

by io.github.creator35lwb-web

coordination_team_status

Return current team coordination state and session summary.

TEMPORARILY DISABLED — this tool is contained pending a security repair (incident VM-IR-2026-07-28-COORD-01) and always returns a denial.

This summary exposed agent identities, pending actions, open blockers, and a timestamped activity index from a caller-selected namespace with no authenticated ownership check — enough to enumerate a namespace before reading it. It is closed to every caller while owner-scoped access control is rebuilt.

All arguments are accepted for schema stability and are ignored.

Returns: A COORDINATION_TEMPORARILY_DISABLED error with an incident reference.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pioneer_keyNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses the security incident (VM-IR-2026-07-28-COORD-01), the lack of authenticated ownership check, the denial behavior, and the exact error type returned. This fully informs the agent of behavioral outcomes.

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?

The description is well-structured and front-loaded with the critical disabled status. Every sentence adds necessary context: the security incident, why it is closed, that parameters are ignored, and the return behavior. No redundant information exists.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's disabled state, the description is complete. It explains the cause, the scope of the shutdown, that all arguments are ignored, and what response the caller will receive. An agent has all information needed to avoid misuse.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description explicitly states 'All arguments are accepted for schema stability and are ignored.' This fully explains the behavior of the single parameter (pioneer_key), compensating for the missing schema-level description.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: it was designed to 'Return current team coordination state and session summary' but is now explicitly 'TEMPORARILY DISABLED' and 'always returns a denial.' This makes the current behavior unambiguous and distinguishes it from all sibling tools by marking it as non-functional.

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?

The description provides explicit when-not-to-use guidance: 'It is closed to every caller while owner-scoped access control is rebuilt.' It also clarifies that all arguments are ignored, so no invocation should be attempted with meaningful parameters. This is stronger than typical usage guidance.

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

All VerifiMind PEAS - RefleXion Trinity 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 clear, distinct purposes: the three consult_agent_* tools are differentiated by agent specialty (CS, X, Z), and the prompt template tools each serve a unique operation. Minor overlap exists between export_prompt_template and get_prompt_template, and between register_custom_template and import_template_from_url, but descriptions clarify the differences.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names predominantly follow a verb_noun pattern (export_, get_, import_, list_, register_, run_, consult_, coordination_handoff_create/read). A minor deviation is coordination_team_status, which is noun_noun, but overall the pattern is predictable and readable.

Tool Count5/5

With 13 tools, the set is well-scoped for a server that combines three-agent consultation, an orchestration command, a coordination subsystem, and prompt template management. Each tool earns its place, though three coordination tools are currently disabled, which slightly reduces their practical value.

Completeness4/5

The core validation workflow is complete: individual agent consultations plus run_full_trinity cover the full X→Z→CS sequence. The prompt template subsystem lacks update and delete operations, which is a minor gap, but the main purpose of the server is well served. The coordination tools are present but disabled, limiting that aspect of the surface.

Resources