Skip to main content
Glama

Arroway

by io.github.oaleviola
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Open a new project

arroway_start_project

Open a NEW project when the work at hand has no home in Arroway. Propose the name and scope to the person FIRST and call only once they agree. update=true renames a project you own and rewrites its scope, when the person asks or the scope is wrong; the slug stays.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesHow people will call it
slugYesShort, lowercase, hyphenated, unique — e.g. 'trading-solana'
scopeYesWhat belongs here and what does not: the subject AND what is out.
updateNotrue: change name and scope of the existing project at slug.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / update
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "true: change name and scope of the existing project at slug.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Changed6 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / name / minLength
      Removed value: -1
    • changedInput schema / properties / scope / description
      Previous value: -"What belongs here and what does not. Written for the next assistant to read before writing — say the subject AND name what is out."New value: +"What belongs here and what does not: the subject AND what is out."
    • removedInput schema / properties / scope / minLength
      Removed value: -1
    • removedInput schema / properties / slug / minLength
      Removed value: -1
    • removedInput schema / properties / slug / pattern
      Removed value: -"^[a-z0-9]+(?:-[a-z0-9]+)*$"
    • removedInput schema / x-maxSerializedLength
      Removed value: -131072
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare non-destructive, non-idempotent, non-open-world, so the safety profile is already covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: update=true overwrites both name and scope, ownership is required ('a project you own'), and the slug is preserved as identity. It doesn't cover failure behavior, e.g. what happens if the slug already exists without update=true.

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?

Three tight sentences with zero filler. The primary use case is front-loaded, the human-approval gate follows, and the secondary update mode is last — exactly the priority order an agent needs.

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, the description carries the create-vs-update distinction, the mutation semantics, and the confirmation prerequisite, which is enough to call the tool correctly. Missing only edge-case behavior such as slug collisions or the default of the update flag.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description genuinely adds meaning: it explains that update=true rewrites name and scope while the slug remains fixed, clarifying the interaction between the required slug/name/scope params and the optional flag. It still doesn't state the default value of update, so it's not a full 5.

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?

Specific verb and resource ('Open a NEW project') plus a clearly delineated second mode ('update=true renames a project you own and rewrites its scope'). An agent immediately understands this is the project-creation/renaming tool and can tell the two modes apart. No sibling in the list deals with projects, so no confusion risk.

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 an explicit when-condition ('when the work at hand has no home in Arroway') and a hard workflow prerequisite ('Propose the name and scope to the person FIRST and call only once they agree'). It also says when to set update=true ('when the person asks or the scope is wrong'). It stops short of naming alternative tools for adjacent cases, which is the only thing keeping it from a 5.

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

All Arroway toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Context All Your Agents Can ShareAgents share what they learn, hand off work, and hold it when you switch models. Start with 5 GB free.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources