Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Axonity Flow MCP Server

Axonity Flow MCP Server

Official
by AxonityAI
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

axonity_conventions

Read authoring conventions to understand the draft-publish lifecycle, create contracts, and wiring rules before building or updating any entity in your tenant.

Instructions

Read the authoring conventions BEFORE creating or updating anything: the draft→publish lifecycle, optimistic locking, per-entity create contracts (required fields, valid enum values, what 'complete' means), how to WIRE tools→agents, agents/tools→workflows and delegation, and how to reproduce a setup by creating new entities and remapping ids (never copy an id across tenants).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "axonity_conventions"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description indicates a pure read operation with no side effects. Since no annotations are provided, the description bears full responsibility for conveying behavior, which it does clearly.

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 a single sentence but packs necessary information efficiently. It front-loads the core instruction and then lists covered topics. Slight denseness prevents a 5.

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

Completeness3/5

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

While the description explains the content of the conventions, it does not mention the output format. Given there is no output schema, the agent is left to assume a string or document, which could be clarified.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema is empty, so the description does not need to add parameter information. It appropriately focuses on what the tool delivers.

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 explicitly states the tool's purpose: to read authoring conventions before creating or updating anything. It clearly distinguishes itself from the many CRUD sibling tools by being a prerequisite reference tool.

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?

The description gives clear guidance on when to use this tool: 'BEFORE creating or updating anything'. It also lists the topics covered, helping the agent determine if the tool is relevant for their task.

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