MCP CPG Human in the Loop (HITL)
Server Details
Navigator for BPC Agentic Procurement
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
- Repository
- greencore-solutions/cpg-human-in-the-loop
- GitHub Stars
- 0
- Server Listing
- MCP CPG Human in the Loop (HITL)
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
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.
Tool Definition Quality
Score is being calculated. Check back soon.
Available Tools
4 toolscheck_rfq_statusCheck ticket statusAInspect
Poll a ticket previously lodged on this MCP (RFQ, terms request, or escalation). Returns current status and, once a human has answered, the answer.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ticket_id | Yes | Ticket ID returned at submission, e.g. HITL-20260719-A1B2C3 |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided; the description discloses polling behavior and answer return but does not cover rate limits, idempotency, or handling of missing tickets. The phrasing is slightly ambiguous about whether it blocks.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two concise sentences with no fluff, front-loaded with purpose.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given simple polling with one parameter and no output schema, the description provides adequate context about ticket types and behavior. It could specify possible statuses but is sufficient.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100%, and the schema already provides a description and pattern. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool polls a ticket for status and answer, distinguishing it from siblings (escalate, request_terms, submit_rfq) which are for submission, not polling.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies use after lodging a ticket, and mentions it returns answer when human responds. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
escalateEscalate to a human (ACM-451)Inspect
Hand a matter that cannot be resolved deterministically to GSC Navigator human review. Emits ACM-451 ESCALATE. Returns a ticket ID for polling via check_rfq_status.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| context | Yes | What was attempted, what could not be resolved, and why | |
| subject | Yes | One-line summary of the matter | |
| related_ticket | No | Optional earlier ticket this relates to | |
| requester_name | Yes | Requesting organization or agent operator | |
| requester_contact | Yes | Reply channel: email or URL a human can answer to |
request_termsRequest termsInspect
Ask a commercial or procedural question — terms, conditions, eligibility context, process. The question is lodged as a ticket and a human answers it. Returns a ticket ID for polling via check_rfq_status.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| subject | Yes | One-line summary of the question | |
| question | Yes | The question a human should answer | |
| related_ticket | No | Optional earlier ticket this relates to | |
| requester_name | Yes | Requesting organization or agent operator | |
| requester_contact | Yes | Reply channel: email or URL a human can answer to |
submit_rfqSubmit RFQInspect
Lodge a request-for-quotation with GreenCore Solutions Corp. A human reviews and answers every ticket — no order is decided by this tool. Returns a ticket ID for polling via check_rfq_status. Optionally reference a GTIN resolved on mcp.cpgknowledgegraph.ai and an SM-ECO-10060 market code.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| gtin | No | Optional GTIN reference (as resolved on the CPG Knowledge Graph) | |
| market | No | Optional SM-ECO-10060 member code, e.g. FR, AU, MX | |
| details | Yes | Full request: product, volumes, timing, destination | |
| subject | Yes | One-line summary of the RFQ | |
| quantity | No | Optional quantity / volume expression | |
| requester_name | Yes | Requesting organization or agent operator | |
| requester_contact | Yes | Reply channel: email or URL a human can answer to |
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!
Your Connectors
Sign in to create a connector for this server.