Skip to main content
Glama

Posthog

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Ask Pipeworx Beta

ask_pipeworx_beta
Read-onlyIdempotent

Beta version of ask_pipeworx: identical universal router (same 7,148 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

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qNoAlias for question.
askNoAlias for question.
textNoAlias for question.
inputNoAlias for question.
packsNoOPTIONAL. Restrict routing to these pack slugs (e.g. ["sec-form-d","sec-13f"]) — the router then picks only from tools in those packs. Omit for the default full-catalog routing. Slugs come from list_packs / search_packs / https://pipeworx.io/directory; unlisted or unknown slugs are ignored and named in _meta.pack_scope.ignored, and if none of them resolves the question is routed across the whole catalog with _meta.pack_scope.full_catalog:true (never an empty answer).
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. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / packs
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "OPTIONAL. Restrict routing to these pack slugs (e.g. [\"sec-form-d\",\"sec-13f\"]) — the router then picks only from tools in those packs. Omit for the default full-catalog routing. Slugs come from list_packs / search_packs / https://pipeworx.io/directory; unlisted or unknown slugs are ignored and named in _meta.pack_scope.ignored, and if none of them resolves the question is routed across the whole catalog with _meta.pack_scope.full_catalog:true (never an empty answer).",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, which already mark this as a safe read-only, idempotent operation, the description discloses beta status, that no candidate is currently active, that it matches the stable router today, that no fallback exists, and that results are compared against the stable router. These are exactly the behavioral traits an agent needs to decide whether to use the experimental edge.

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 key distinction is front-loaded: beta version of ask_pipeworx with candidate routing improvements. The description is somewhat repetitive ('identical', 'matches exactly', 'exactly like ask_pipeworx') but still efficient for the amount of behavioral context it conveys.

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?

For a router tool with annotations covering safety and no output schema, the description is largely complete: it explains the relationship to ask_pipeworx, current beta state, fallback behavior, and that the response shape is identical. It could be slightly more complete by describing the response shape directly rather than only by reference.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the question argument, its aliases, and the packs parameter in detail. The description adds only 'same arguments' and does not enrich parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, which is the baseline for full coverage.

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 identifies a specific resource (a universal router over 7,148 tools) and explicitly distinguishes it from the stable sibling ask_pipeworx as the experimental edge. It also confirms the arguments and response shape are identical, so an agent can tell what it is without opening another schema.

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?

It gives a clear condition for use: 'Use it exactly like ask_pipeworx when you want the newest routing.' It also explains the current state (no candidate active, so it matches ask_pipeworx exactly) and references comparison against the stable router. It stops short of an explicit 'use ask_pipeworx instead when…' exclusion.

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

All Posthog 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