Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

PatrolTech

by online.patroltech
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Propose creating a route

patroltech_routes_propose_create

Use when you want to create a route with its checkpoints and schedules. It only adds a proposal to the pending batch of this connection (up to 10 changes); nothing changes in the account yet. Show the returned summaries to the user and call patroltech_proposals_confirm only after they agree.

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": {
      "name": "<name>",
      "checkpoints": "<checkpoints>",
      "timeWindows": "<timeWindows>"
    },
    "name": "patroltech_routes_propose_create"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesRoute name.
locationNoLocation of the route. Ask for it only if there are several.
checkpointsYesNames of the checkpoints of the route, in the order they are walked.
strictOrderNotrue = they must be scanned in that order. Default: no.
timeWindowsYesSchedules of the route, in the local time of the account.
organizationNoOmit unless the account has more than one organization; then the exact name (or id) as listed by patroltech_account_get_context.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations say readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds the crucial nuance that nothing changes in the account yet: the call only appends a proposal to the pending batch, capped at 10 changes. That staging semantics and batch limit are exactly the kind of context annotations cannot express.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the trigger, then the side-effect model, then the required follow-up. Nothing is repeated from the title and no sentence is 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?

For a non-destructive staging tool with no output schema, the description covers trigger, side effects, batch cap, and the confirm step, and it implies a summary is returned. It stops short of saying what happens when the 10-change batch is already full, which is the one operational gap.

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 name, checkpoints, timeWindows, strictOrder, location and organization. The description adds no extra parameter meaning (e.g. how checkpoints relate to existing checkpoint records or timezone handling), so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource plus scope: 'create a route with its checkpoints and schedules'. That scope implicitly separates it from the narrower siblings (patroltech_routes_propose_add_time_window, patroltech_routes_propose_change_checkpoint), but it never names them, so differentiation is inferred rather than explicit.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Opens with an explicit trigger ('Use when you want to create a route...'), states the staging constraint, and names the follow-up tool plus its precondition: call patroltech_proposals_confirm only after the user agrees. This is a complete when/how/next workflow, not just a trigger.

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

All PatrolTech 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