Skip to main content
Glama

get_group_status

Check the current status of a registered test group in QIT Manager to monitor testing progress and results.

Instructions

Fetch the status of a registered test group from QIT Manager.

⚠️ QIT CLI not detected. QIT CLI not found. Please install it using one of these methods:

  1. Via Composer (recommended): composer require woocommerce/qit-cli --dev

  2. Set QIT_CLI_PATH environment variable: export QIT_CLI_PATH=/path/to/qit

  3. Ensure 'qit' is available in your system PATH

For more information, visit: https://github.com/woocommerce/qit-cli

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
groupYesName of the test group to fetch status for
jsonNoReturn output in JSON format

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function implementing the core logic of the 'get_group_status' tool. It builds CLI arguments for the 'group:fetch' command using buildArgs and executes it via executeAndFormat, returning the formatted result.
    handler: async (args: { group: string; json?: boolean }) => {
      const cmdArgs = buildArgs("group:fetch", [args.group], {
        json: args.json,
      });
      return executeAndFormat(cmdArgs);
    },
  • Zod schema for input validation: requires 'group' string, optional 'json' boolean.
    inputSchema: z.object({
      group: z.string().describe("Name of the test group to fetch status for"),
      json: z
        .boolean()
        .optional()
        .describe("Return output in JSON format"),
    }),
  • Tool definition and registration object 'groupsTools' exporting the 'get_group_status' tool with name, description, inputSchema, and handler.
    export const groupsTools = {
      get_group_status: {
        name: "get_group_status",
        description: "Fetch the status of a registered test group from QIT Manager.",
        inputSchema: z.object({
          group: z.string().describe("Name of the test group to fetch status for"),
          json: z
            .boolean()
            .optional()
            .describe("Return output in JSON format"),
        }),
        handler: async (args: { group: string; json?: boolean }) => {
          const cmdArgs = buildArgs("group:fetch", [args.group], {
            json: args.json,
          });
          return executeAndFormat(cmdArgs);
        },
      },
    };
  • Central registration aggregating all tool sets, including groupsTools containing 'get_group_status', into 'allTools'.
    export const allTools = {
      ...authTools,
      ...testExecutionTools,
      ...testResultsTools,
      ...groupsTools,
      ...environmentTools,
      ...packagesTools,
      ...configTools,
      ...utilitiesTools,
  • src/server.ts:25-38 (registration)
    MCP server request handler for listing tools, dynamically generating the tools list from allTools including schemas and descriptions for 'get_group_status'.
    server.setRequestHandler(ListToolsRequestSchema, async () => {
      // Check if QIT CLI is available
      const cliInfo = detectQitCli();
    
      const tools = Object.entries(allTools).map(([_, tool]) => ({
        name: tool.name,
        description: cliInfo
          ? tool.description
          : `${tool.description}\n\n⚠️ QIT CLI not detected. ${getQitCliNotFoundError()}`,
        inputSchema: zodToJsonSchema(tool.inputSchema),
      }));
    
      return { tools };
    });
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions a CLI dependency issue but fails to describe what the tool actually does behaviorally (e.g., what 'status' includes, whether it's a read-only operation, error handling, or output format beyond the JSON parameter). The CLI warning is context but not core behavioral transparency.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is poorly structured: the first sentence is useful, but the rest is verbose CLI installation instructions that don't belong in a tool description. This wastes space and buries the purpose, making it less front-loaded and concise than ideal.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on what 'status' entails, how results are returned, or error conditions. The CLI warning adds noise but not completeness for the tool's functionality, leaving significant gaps for a tool with two parameters.

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 fully documents both parameters ('group' and 'json'). The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema, maintaining the baseline score of 3 for adequate coverage without extra value.

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 'fetch' and the resource 'status of a registered test group from QIT Manager', which is specific and understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_test_result' or 'get_test_report', which might also retrieve status-related information.

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 QIT CLI installation issues but doesn't explain the tool's context relative to siblings like 'get_test_result' or 'run_test_group', leaving the agent without usage direction.

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/woocommerce/qit-mcp'

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