Skip to main content
Glama

LexQ

by io.lexq.mcp
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Create Policy Version

lexq_versions_create

Create a new DRAFT version in a policy group. Optionally provide a commit message and effective date range. A group can hold at most 20 DRAFT versions at a time; published versions do not count. Publish or delete drafts to make room.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
groupIdYesPolicy group ID
effectiveToNoEffective end, ISO-8601 instant with Z or an offset, e.g. 2026-10-01T00:00:00Z or 2026-10-01T09:00:00+09:00. A bare date or a time without an offset is rejected.
commitMessageNoCommit message describing this version
effectiveFromNoEffective start, ISO-8601 instant with Z or an offset, e.g. 2026-10-01T00:00:00Z or 2026-10-01T09:00:00+09:00. A bare date or a time without an offset is rejected.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / effectiveFrom / description
      Previous value: -"Effective start date (ISO 8601)"New value: +"Effective start, ISO-8601 instant with Z or an offset, e.g. 2026-10-01T00:00:00Z or 2026-10-01T09:00:00+09:00. A bare date or a time without an offset is rejected."
    • changedInput schema / properties / effectiveTo / description
      Previous value: -"Effective end date (ISO 8601)"New value: +"Effective end, ISO-8601 instant with Z or an offset, e.g. 2026-10-01T00:00:00Z or 2026-10-01T09:00:00+09:00. A bare date or a time without an offset is rejected."
  2. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / properties / groupId / pattern
      Added value: +"^([0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[1-8][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[89abAB][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12}|00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000|ffffffff-ffff-ffff-ffff-ffffffffffff)$"
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "groupId",
-  "commitMessage"
-]New value: +[
+  "groupId"
+]
  4. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations cover the non-destructive write profile, and the description adds the meaningful business constraint of a 20-draft-per-group cap. It stops short of describing response or whether the new draft is based on an existing version.

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, front-loaded with the action, then optional inputs, then the limit constraint. No filler.

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?

Covers purpose, inputs and the key quota constraint for a 4-param mutation with no output schema. A note on what the created version inherits would make it fully complete.

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 coverage is 100% and each parameter already has a detailed description (including ISO-8601 offset rules), so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description only gestures at the optional commit message and effective range without adding format detail.

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 verb and resource ('Create a new DRAFT version in a policy group') and names the lifecycle state, clearly distinguishing it from the many deploy/publish/update siblings.

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?

The 20-draft limit plus 'Publish or delete drafts to make room' gives explicit remediation context, but it doesn't distinguish this create from lexq_versions_clone or lexq_versions_update.

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

All LexQ toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources