workbuddy-subagent-bridge

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

workbuddy_session_send

Send follow-up messages to an active WorkBuddy session to provide additional instructions or resolve clarifications, enabling continuous task delegation without starting a new session.

Instructions

Send a follow-up message to the same WorkBuddy session.

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": {
      "taskId": "<taskId>",
      "message": "<message>"
    },
    "name": "workbuddy_session_send"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`taskId`	Yes
`message`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 23, 2026

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits. It only states the action without revealing side effects (e.g., message delivery, session state changes), requirements (active session), or error behavior. The agent is left guessing about potential mutations or constraints.

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 concise sentence with no filler, front-loaded with the action. It is appropriately short, though it could add a bit more context without becoming verbose, hence not a 5.

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?

For a tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It lacks parameter explanations, usage context, and behavioral expectations, making it inadequate for an agent to reliably select and invoke the tool.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate by explaining taskId and message. It does not mention either parameter, leaving their meaning and purpose completely undocumented. This is a critical gap for a tool with only two required parameters.

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 states a specific verb ('send') and a resource ('follow-up message to the same WorkBuddy session'), which clearly indicates the action and distinguishes it from start, cancel, close, and status. However, it does not elaborate on what 'follow-up' implies or contrast with permission_reply, leaving some ambiguity.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage within an existing session ('same WorkBuddy session') but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, nor when not to use it (e.g., when no session exists). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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

Deploy Server