The pre-registered go-live gate: criteria frozen on 2026-07-05, current progress, and the binding interpretation (this gate tests operational competence, not alpha).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description adds useful behavioral context: criteria are frozen on a specific date, and the gate tests operational competence, not alpha. This provides a clear purpose and boundaries beyond a generic status check.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, well-structured sentence that packs essential information: what the gate is, criteria frozen date, what it reports, and a key interpretation note. No filler or redundancy.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a status tool with no output schema, the description explains the nature and scope of the gate. It could be more precise about the output fields, but it sufficiently informs an agent of the tool's purpose and constraints.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
There are zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4; the description does not need to add parameter info, and it doesn't, but the context of the tool is well conveyed.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool provides status for a pre-registered go-live gate, specifying frozen criteria, current progress, and interpretation. It uniquely identifies the resource, distinguishing it from siblings like fleet_overview or kill_list.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
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, but the context implies it is the go-to for gate status. The lack of sibling overlap reduces the need for exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clear, distinct purpose: fleet_overview summarizes all sleeves, sleeve_record drills into one, gate_status tracks the go-live gate, kill_list logs rejected ideas, research_journal lists documents, research_note fetches a single document, and site_guide explains the platform. The only close pair is fleet_overview vs. sleeve_record, but their scopes (global vs. single sleeve) prevent confusion.
All tool names follow the same lowercase snake_case pattern with two tokens separated by an underscore (e.g., fleet_overview, gate_status, research_note). There are no mixed conventions like camelCase or inconsistent verb styles.
Seven tools is ideal for a read-only transparency platform. Each tool covers a distinct aspect of the domain without redundancy, and the count is well within the typical well-scoped 3–15 range.
The tool set fully covers its stated purpose: aggregate and per-sleeve performance, research journal and note retrieval, failure records, gate status, and self-description. There are no obvious dead ends—users can start at the overview, drill into details, and access all published documentation.
