Skip to main content
Glama
Cafelatte1

FronyBoard

get_status

Retrieves a project's complete status in one call: progress overview, milestone goals, task counts by status, open tasks with blockers, and recently completed work for a cold start.

Instructions

Use it first when you start on a project, and when the user asks where it stands (progress, what's left, what's in progress).

The resume: everything an agent needs to pick a project up cold, in one call. The
latest year's overview (goal / now / target / checklist); per period its milestone goal
and status (a period without a milestone has no goal and reports active while open, done
once closed), task counts by status, whether it is closed, and `open_tasks` — every
todo / blocked / in_progress task with its title, tags, branch, one-line content and
`waiting_on`; and `recent_done` — the ten most recently finished tasks across every period, newest
first, each with its content, its `check` and when it completed. Closed periods are
included.

`recent_done` is what the project already has, in the words of whoever built it, and
`check` is what they said proves it. Both are claims: confirm against the code before
building on one. Older finished work and cancelled tasks are list_tasks; the plan as
written is get_roadmap.

Call it once at the start of a session; there is nothing to poll for afterwards.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keyYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does well: it explains what is included in the resume, that closed periods are included, and that recent_done/check are claims to verify. It stops short of explicitly stating read-only behavior, permissions, or side effects, which keeps it from a 5.

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 front-loaded with the usage condition and the main value proposition, then details the return payload. It is somewhat long, but the detail is mostly earned because there is no output schema.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a complex status tool with no output schema, the description does an unusually complete job describing the returned overview, per-period data, open_tasks, and recent_done. The remaining gap is the undocumented required `key` parameter and lack of explicit read-only confirmation.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% and the description never explains the sole required parameter `key`. The surrounding text implies it identifies a project, but it does not say the expected format or where to obtain it.

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 states a specific verb and resource: it returns a project's status/resume snapshot for picking work up cold. It clearly distinguishes itself from list_tasks and get_roadmap, so an agent can identify the right tool without inspecting schemas.

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?

It gives explicit when-to-use guidance: call first when starting a project and when the user asks where things stand. It also names alternatives for older/cancelled work and for the plan, and warns not to poll after the initial call.

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