Skip to main content
Glama

cypher-mcp

by io.github.lonniev
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

cypher_record_triage

Record the Porter's triage of a GitHub issue.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
npubNo
titleYesIssue title.
repo_urlYesThe repository's actual GitHub URL (gh repo view --json url).
issue_urlYesThe issue's actual GitHub URL (gh issue view <n> --json url).
repo_nameYesRepository name.
dpop_tokenNo
dispositionYesRouting disposition, e.g. 'agent/fix', 'rejected', 'blocked/upstream'.
issue_numberYesGitHub issue number.
classificationYestype/* classification, e.g. 'bug'.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added
  2. Removed
  3. Added
  4. Removed
  5. Added
  6. Removed
  7. Added
  8. Removed
  9. Added
  10. Removed
  11. Added
  12. Removed
  13. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / issue_url
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The issue's actual GitHub URL (gh issue view <n> --json url).",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / repo_url
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The repository's actual GitHub URL (gh repo view --json url).",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "title",
-  "repo_name",
-  "disposition",
-  "issue_number",
-  "classification"
-]New value: +[
+  "title",
+  "repo_url",
+  "issue_url",
+  "repo_name",
+  "disposition",
+  "issue_number",
+  "classification"
+]
  14. First observed

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'record triage' but does not disclose side effects, idempotency, permissions, or what happens if a duplicate triage is attempted. The behavior beyond the basic action is opaque.

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 wasted words. It could benefit from slight expansion (e.g., clarifying 'Porter'), but it remains efficient.

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?

For a tool with 7 required parameters and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It fails to explain the recording mechanism, return value, or how it integrates with other issue tools, leaving significant gaps.

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?

With 78% schema description coverage, the schema already provides useful descriptions for most parameters (e.g., disposition examples). The tool description itself adds no additional parameter context beyond schema defaults.

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 action (record triage) and the resource (GitHub issue), using a specific verb and noun. It distinguishes from siblings like 'cypher_claim_issue' or 'cypher_report_issue' by focusing on triage recording.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given many issue-related sibling tools (e.g., 'cypher_claim_issue', 'cypher_route_rejection'), the description should explicitly indicate the context for triage recording.

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

All cypher-mcp toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources