Ruforge

Углубить компетенцию

ruforge_deep_dive_start

УГЛУБЛЁННАЯ диагностика ОДНОЙ компетенции (после базовой — по зоне роста, или по запросу): ~10 вопросов по её подкомпетенциям, 5–8 минут, результат — уровень 1–4 по каждой подкомпетенции и точки роста. Ведение то же: один вопрос за сообщение (заголовок из progress), ответы через ruforge_diagnostic_answer, итог — ruforge_diagnostic_finish. Не придумывайте собственные вопросы углубления — используйте этот инструмент.

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": {
      "competency": "<competency>",
      "role": "<role>"
    },
    "name": "ruforge_deep_dive_start"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`role`	Yes	Роль пользователя (та же, что в базовой диагностике)
`source`	No	Название ассистента для аналитики (utm_source)
`competency`	Yes	Компетенция: номер 1–10 или slug (strategy, decisions, execution, people, leadership, change, product, culture, entrepreneurship, selfdev) — см. ruforge_get_competencies
`access_token`	No	access_token из ruforge_profile_check / ruforge_profile_confirm — результат сохранится в историю профиля
`company_size`	No
`direct_reports`	No
`respondent_name`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 25, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / access_token

Added value: +{
+  "description": "access_token из ruforge_profile_check / ruforge_profile_confirm — результат сохранится в историю профиля",
+  "type": "string"
+}

removedInput schema / properties / user_id

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "ID профиля RuForge (из ruforge_profile_confirm) — результат сохранится в историю профиля",
-  "type": "string"
-}

AddedOct 24, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false. The description adds rich behavioral context: ~10 questions, 5–8 minutes, result as levels per sub-competency and growth points, and the interaction pattern (one question per message, answers via ruforge_diagnostic_answer, summary via ruforge_diagnostic_finish). It does not mention that repeated calls create new sessions (idempotentHint=false) or auth requirements, but overall adds substantial value.

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 dense paragraph that is front-loaded with purpose and then explains the flow and a critical directive. Every sentence earns its place: it covers what, when, how, and a warning, with no redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (7 parameters, multi-step interaction, no output schema), the description is fairly complete: it explains the purpose, process, result format, and references related tools. It lacks explicit details for three parameters, but the core behavior and usage are sufficiently covered for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 57% (4 of 7 parameters have descriptions). The description does not compensate for the missing descriptions of company_size, direct_reports, and respondent_name. It does helpfully point to ruforge_get_competencies for competency values, but otherwise adds no meaning beyond the partially described schema.

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?

The description states a specific verb+resource: 'УГЛУБЛЁННАЯ диагностика ОДНОЙ компетенции' (deep diagnostics of one competency), with scope (~10 questions, 5–8 min, result levels per sub-competency). It distinguishes from the basic diagnostic by saying 'после базовой' (after the basic one) and explicitly warns against inventing own questions.

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?

It clearly states when to use: after the basic diagnostic by growth zone or on request. It also directs the agent to the specific answer and finish tools for subsequent steps, and says not to invent questions. However, it does not explicitly say when NOT to use (e.g., if no basic diagnostic exists), leaving a small gap.

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

All Ruforge tools Inspect

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

Need Help?