Skip to main content
Glama

Sec Adv

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Ask Pipeworx Beta

ask_pipeworx_beta
Read-onlyIdempotent

Beta version of ask_pipeworx: identical universal router (same 7,151 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

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/openWorld/non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavior: it is a full working router (not a thin shim), it never falls back to nothing, no candidate is currently active as of 2026-07-26, and its results feed comparison against the stable router. It doesn't mention latency, rate limits, or routing transparency details, which keeps it from a 5.

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-loaded with the identity and current-state caveat, which is the most decision-relevant fact. The closing "Falls back to nothing — this IS a full working router, just the experimental edge" is slightly redundant restatement, keeping it from a 5.

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 100% schema coverage, no output schema, and full annotations, the description covers purpose, current operational state, comparison/telemetry side effects, and fallback behavior. Only latency/cost or what _meta contains beyond pack_scope is left implicit.

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 every parameter including the alias set and the `packs` scoping/ignored-slug fallback semantics is already documented. The description's "same arguments" adds no meaning beyond that, so the baseline 3 is correct.

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 exactly what the tool is (a universal router over the same 7,151 tools as ask_pipeworx) and how it differs (candidate routing improvements enabled live when under test). An agent can immediately tell it apart from ask_pipeworx and ask_pipeworx_grounded, including the fact that it currently behaves identically to the stable router.

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?

"Use it exactly like ask_pipeworx when you want the newest routing" gives a clear selection condition, and "results are compared against the stable router to decide what merges" explains the trade-off. It stops short of an explicit when-not-to-use rule (e.g. prefer ask_pipeworx for reproducible/production answers), but the context is strong enough to choose correctly.

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

All Sec Adv 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