Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Whisper

by io.github.whisper-sec
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

agents: task

whisper_agents_task
Read-only

The task operation on the Whisper control plane, served as CALL whisper.agents({op:'task', args:{...}}). Requires your Whisper API key. The identifier in the example is a placeholder for one of YOUR agents: list them with the "agents.list" skill and {"kind":"agents"}. Example call: {"skill":"agents.task","input":{"agent":"agent-a1f4c0b2d3e4f5a67"}} Needs a linked Whisper account (OAuth) or your API key in the X-API-Key header.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "input": "<input>"
    },
    "name": "whisper_agents_task"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
inputYesArguments for this operation, as an object. The example passes {"agent":"agent-a1f4c0b2d3e4f5a67"}.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
rowsYesThe answers, one object per row, keyed by the column names above. An empty array means the question was understood and nothing matched, which is an answer and not a failure.
columnsYesThe column names, in order. Every row object has exactly these keys, so this is the row shape and reading it is cheaper than inspecting a row.
statisticsNoWhat the query cost.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true, and the description does not contradict that. It adds useful operational context beyond the annotations: authentication via linked OAuth account or X-API-Key header, and the fact that the sample identifier is a placeholder. It still says nothing about what the operation returns or how it behaves for unknown agents.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Authentication and the placeholder caveat are front-loaded enough, but the invocation is stated twice (the CALL whisper.agents({op:'task'}) form and the {"skill":"agents.task","input":{...}} example), and the same example object is repeated in the schema. Trimming one of these would sharpen it without losing information.

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?

Although an output schema exists so return values need not be described, the description leaves the core semantics of a "task" entirely undefined for a tool with 23+ sibling operations. An agent can construct the call but cannot judge whether this is the right operation or what effect to expect.

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%, but the schema only describes a generic opaque "input" object; the description is the only place revealing the concrete key ("agent") and its expected shape as an agent identifier. It also explains that the example value is a placeholder for one of the caller's own agents, which the schema does not.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

"The task operation on the Whisper control plane" restates the tool name (whisper_agents_task) without saying what a task does — create, run, inspect, or cancel? Nothing distinguishes it from sibling operations like agent, history, trace, or verify. The only concrete substance is invocation syntax and the required agent identifier.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It does tell the agent to resolve the identifier first via the agents.list skill, which is actionable guidance. However, it never says when to choose this operation over the many adjacent agent operations, nor what preconditions or outcomes select it.

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

All Whisper 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