Skip to main content
Glama

Arbeitnow

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Ask Pipeworx Beta

ask_pipeworx_beta
Read-onlyIdempotent

Beta version of ask_pipeworx: identical universal router (same 6,679 tools, same arguments, same response shape) with candidate routing improvements enabled live whenever one is under test. No candidate is active right now (the last was retired on outcome evidence 2026-07-26), so this currently matches ask_pipeworx exactly. Use it exactly like ask_pipeworx when you want the newest routing; results are compared against the stable router to decide what merges. Falls back to nothing — this IS a full working router, just the experimental edge.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qNoAlias for question.
askNoAlias for question.
textNoAlias for question.
inputNoAlias for question.
queryNoAlias for question.
promptNoAlias for question.
messageNoAlias for question.
questionYesYour question or request in natural language. Accepts query, q, prompt, text, input, ask, message as aliases.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / ask
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Alias for question.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / message
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Alias for question.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / question / description
      Previous value: -"Your question or request in natural language. Accepts query, q, prompt, text, input as aliases."New value: +"Your question or request in natural language. Accepts query, q, prompt, text, input, ask, message as aliases."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "question": "What is the current US unemployment rate?"
+  }
+]
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive behavior, so the bar is lower. The description adds real value beyond them: it discloses that no candidate is currently active (so it matches the stable router today), that results are compared against the stable router, and that it falls back to nothing.

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?

Front-loads the essential distinction (identical router, experimental edge) and then justifies current equivalence early. Some material is redundant repetition ('same arguments, same response shape') and the retirement-date detail is arguably trivia, but the narrative remains coherent.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by asserting the response shape matches ask_pipeworx, plus explaining current and future behavior. It does not literally describe the return structure, but the reference to a known sibling covers the essential need for a router tool.

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 8 parameters and 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents 'question' and each alias (q, ask, text, input, query, prompt, message). The description only says 'same arguments' without adding format, length, or content guidance, so it stays at the baseline.

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?

States a specific role (universal router over 6,679 tools) and explicitly positions itself as the experimental twin of ask_pipeworx, with matching arguments and response shape. An agent can immediately tell what it is and how it differs from the stable sibling.

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 selection condition: 'Use it exactly like ask_pipeworx when you want the newest routing,' naming ask_pipeworx as the alternative. It does not state when NOT to use it (e.g., when stability matters), so the routing is strongly implied but not fully closed.

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

All Arbeitnow 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