Skip to main content
Glama
cfrs2005

GS Robot MCP Server

by cfrs2005

submit_temp_site_task

Submit temporary tasks for GS cleaning robots with specific site, map, and area information to execute cleaning operations.

Instructions

Submits a temporary task with site information for S-line robots.

Args:
    task_data: Task data including site, map, and area information.

Returns:
    A dictionary containing the task submission result.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
task_dataYes

Implementation Reference

  • MCP tool handler for 'submit_temp_site_task'. Registers the tool and delegates to GausiumMCP.submit_temp_site_task.
    @mcp.tool()
    async def submit_temp_site_task(task_data: dict):
        """Submits a temporary task with site information for S-line robots.
    
        Args:
            task_data: Task data including site, map, and area information.
    
        Returns:
            A dictionary containing the task submission result.
        """
        return await mcp.submit_temp_site_task(task_data=task_data)
  • Core implementation of submit_temp_site_task in GausiumMCP class. Calls the Gausium API endpoint via client.
    async def submit_temp_site_task(
        self,
        task_data: Dict[str, Any]
    ) -> Dict[str, Any]:
        """
        S线有站点临时任务下发。
    
        Args:
            task_data: 任务数据,包含站点、地图、区域等信息
    
        Returns:
            任务下发结果
    
        Raises:
            ValueError: 任务数据无效
            httpx.HTTPStatusError: API调用错误
            httpx.RequestError: 网络问题
        """
        if not task_data:
            raise ValueError("Task data cannot be empty")
    
        async with GausiumAPIClient() as client:
            return await client.call_endpoint(
                'submit_temp_site_task',
                json_data=task_data
            )
  • API endpoint configuration/schema for the submit_temp_site_task endpoint, defining path, method, and version.
    'submit_temp_site_task': APIEndpoint(
        name="submit_temp_site_task",
        path="tasks/temporary/site",
        method=HTTPMethod.POST,
        version=APIVersion.V1_ALPHA1,
        description="S线有站点临时任务下发"
  • Usage of submit_temp_site_task endpoint in S-line site task workflow.
    task_result = await client.call_endpoint(
        'submit_temp_site_task',
        json_data=task_data
    )
  • Tool registration via @mcp.tool() decorator in main.py.
    @mcp.tool()
    async def submit_temp_site_task(task_data: dict):
        """Submits a temporary task with site information for S-line robots.
    
        Args:
            task_data: Task data including site, map, and area information.
    
        Returns:
            A dictionary containing the task submission result.
        """
        return await mcp.submit_temp_site_task(task_data=task_data)
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states 'submits a temporary task' which implies a write/mutation operation, but lacks critical behavioral details such as required permissions, whether the task is queued or executed immediately, error handling, or any side effects. The return value is vaguely described as 'a dictionary containing the task submission result', offering minimal insight into output structure or success indicators.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by structured Args and Returns sections. It avoids unnecessary verbosity, but the Args section could be more informative given the low schema coverage. Overall, it's efficiently organized with minimal waste.

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?

Given the complexity (1 parameter with nested objects, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on task lifecycle, error conditions, authentication needs, and specific data formats for 'task_data'. The vague return description and absence of behavioral context make it inadequate for safe and effective tool invocation by an AI agent.

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 0%, with one parameter 'task_data' documented only as 'Task data including site, map, and area information' in the description. This adds some semantic context beyond the schema's generic 'object' type, listing key components, but doesn't specify data formats, required fields, or constraints, leaving significant gaps in parameter understanding.

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 verb 'submits' and the resource 'temporary task with site information for S-line robots', which is specific and actionable. It distinguishes from the sibling 'submit_temp_no_site_task' by specifying 'site information', but doesn't fully differentiate from other task-related tools like 'execute_s_line_site_task_workflow' in terms of scope or use case.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions 'S-line robots' but doesn't specify prerequisites, constraints, or compare it to siblings like 'submit_temp_no_site_task' or 'execute_s_line_site_task_workflow', leaving the agent to infer usage context from tool names alone.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/cfrs2005/mcp-gs-robot'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server