Roundtable

Debug Issue

debug-issue

Debugging council. Root Cause Analyst, Systems Engineer, and Edge Case Investigator collaboratively diagnose bugs, analyze errors, and propose fixes.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`code`	No	The relevant code where the bug occurs
`error`	No	Error message, stack trace, or unexpected output
`problem`	Yes	Describe the bug, failure, or unexpected behavior
`knowledge`	No	Reference knowledge to inject as context
`webhook_url`	No	Webhook URL to POST results to after completion
`thinking_level`	No	Analysis depth	medium
`session_context`	No	Session IDs to use as context (max 3). Prior moderator summaries will be prepended.
`expected_behavior`	No	What should happen vs what actually happens

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

First observedMar 11, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent, and open-world behavior. The description adds collaborative council context and role names, but does not disclose side effects like webhook delivery, session_context handling, or knowledge fetching. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

The description is a single concise sentence, front-loaded with 'Debugging council,' and includes role names that add value without fluff. It avoids repetition of schema details and is easy to scan.

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?

With 8 parameters and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not describe what a result looks like, how webhook_url or session_context affect execution, or the overall process. This is a significant gap for a complex 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?

Input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the description does not need to add much. It does not mention parameter-specific semantics beyond the schema, justifying the baseline score of 3.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'diagnose bugs, analyze errors, and propose fixes' via a 'debugging council' with specific roles. This distinguishes it from siblings like review-code or plan-implementation. It is not a tautology and uses specific verbs.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not state prerequisites like providing code/error/problem, nor does it exclude cases better suited for other tools. The intended use is only implied by the word 'debugging'.

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

All Roundtable tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

The tool set separates general consultation (consult-council) from specialized councils for tradeoffs, debugging, architecture, implementation planning, and code review. Session management and utility tools (logs, usage, models, sessions) are clearly distinct. Only minor potential overlap exists between consult-council and the specialized councils, but descriptions clarify the purpose of each.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., consult-council, get-session, list-models). Verbs are varied but predictable, and compound nouns are hyphenated consistently. No mixed conventions.

Tool Count5/5

13 tools is appropriate for a platform that offers multiple council workflows plus session, log, and usage management. Each tool addresses a distinct need without unnecessary bloat.

Completeness5/5

The server covers the full lifecycle of a council-based workflow: model discovery (list-models), execution (consult-council and specialized councils), session retrieval (list-sessions, get-session), sharing (get-thread-link, set-thread-visibility), and operational support (check-usage, get-logs). Missing delete/update session tools are minor and not essential for the core purpose.

Resources

Need Help?