Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Axonity Flow MCP Server

Axonity Flow MCP Server

Official
by AxonityAI
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

attach_policy_to_agent

Attach a policy to an agent to define the rules and permissions the agent must follow when executing tasks.

Instructions

Scope a policy to a agent so the agent uses it. Verify it landed with list_agent_policies before request_publish_agent — the link lives outside the entity body, so re-reading the agent will not show 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": {
      "agentId": "<agentId>",
      "policyId": "<policyId>"
    },
    "name": "attach_policy_to_agent"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
agentIdYes
policyIdYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses a key behavioral trait: the policy link is not reflected in the agent's entity body, so re-reading the agent won't show it. This is valuable for understanding the tool's 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 sentences with zero wasted words. The description is efficient and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by essential usage guidance.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is complete. It explains the action, its effect, and a verification step. No additional information is necessary.

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 has 0% description coverage for parameters. The name and description imply that agentId and policyId are required, but no explicit details about format or constraints are given. This minimal compensation earns a baseline score.

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 clearly states that the tool scopes a policy to an agent so the agent uses it. The verb 'scope' and the resource 'policy to agent' are specific, and the context of verifying with list_agent_policies distinguishes it from other tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly instructs to verify the attachment with list_agent_policies before request_publish_agent, and explains why (the link lives outside the entity body). This provides clear when-to-use and what to check after.

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