Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@vibemap.ai/mcp-server

@vibemap.ai/mcp-server

by AshMet
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

vibemap_claim_criterion

Claim an acceptance criterion to start implementation, preventing duplicate work with atomic transitions and race condition handling.

Instructions

Atomically claim an acceptance criterion for implementation. Transitions ready → in_progress. Returns 409 (race) if another agent already claimed it.

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": {
      "criterionId": "<criterionId>"
    },
    "name": "vibemap_claim_criterion"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
criterionIdYesAcceptance criterion UUID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.5.2

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Describes atomic claim with state transition and race condition (409). No annotations contradictions; adds value beyond annotations by detailing behavior.

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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences with no wasted words. Every sentence adds value.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior, race condition, and state transition completely.

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 coverage is 100% with one parameter described as 'Acceptance criterion UUID'. Description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states the action (atomically claim), resource (acceptance criterion), purpose (for implementation), and effect (transition ready → in_progress). Distinguishes from sibling tools like update or create.

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?

Implies when to use (claiming a criterion for implementation) and mentions race condition (409). Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but context is clear.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools