Skip to main content
Glama
ComplianceCow

ComplianceCow MCP Server

create_support_ticket

Create structured support tickets through mandatory user review and explicit approval workflows. Pre-fills descriptions, validates priority levels, converts approved content to HTML format, and prevents input errors before submission.

Instructions

PURPOSE:

  • Create structured support tickets only after strict user review and explicit approval of all descriptions.

  • Ticket creation MUST NOT occur without explicit user confirmation at every required step.

  • Reduce user input errors and rework by ensuring clarity and completeness before ticket submission.

MANDATORY CONDITIONS — NO STEP MAY BE SKIPPED OR BYPASSED:

  1. BEFORE TOOL ENTRY:

  • The tool MUST generate a detailed, pre-filled plain-text description for the task or workflow.

  • The user MUST review this description carefully.

  • Ticket creation MUST be blocked until the user explicitly APPROVES this description.

  1. USER VERIFICATION:

  • The user MUST be presented with the full pre-filled description.

  • The user MUST either confirm its correctness or provide feedback for changes.

  • The tool MUST update the description and priority per feedback and repeat this verification step as many times as needed.

  • Skipping or auto-approving this step is strictly prohibited.

  1. FINAL APPROVAL & FORMATTING:

  • After user approval of the plain text, the description MUST be converted into professional HTML format (bold headings, clear structure, spacing).

  • The user MUST explicitly approve this final HTML-formatted description.

  • The tool MUST block ticket creation until this final approval is given.

  • Only the fully user-approved, HTML-formatted description MAY be used to create the support ticket.

IMPORTANT:
Under no circumstances shall the tool proceed to ticket creation without explicit user approval at all mandatory steps.
The process must strictly enforce these approvals, preventing any premature or automatic ticket submissions.

MANDATORY USER INPUTS:

  • subject (str) — ticket title.

  • description (str) — final user-approved, HTML-formatted description.

  • priority (str) — ticket priority level.
    Valid values: "High", "Medium", "Low" (case-sensitive).
    The user MUST provide one of these values to proceed.

RETURNS:

  • A dictionary simulating the ticket creation response for integration or testing purposes.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
subjectYes
descriptionYes
priorityYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, description fully carries burden by disclosing strict approval gates, HTML conversion requirement, blocking behavior, and return value structure.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Well-structured with headers and bullet points, but excessively verbose with repetitive legalistic warnings ('strictly prohibited', 'under no circumstances') that restate the same constraints multiple times.

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?

Given the simple 3-parameter schema, the description is complete including return value documentation, though the procedural complexity described arguably exceeds what a tool description should enforce.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Comprehensively compensates for 0% schema description coverage by defining all three parameters (subject as title, description as HTML-formatted, priority with valid enum values).

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?

States specific purpose (create structured support tickets) but buries it under extensive procedural requirements rather than distinguishing from sibling tools.

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?

Extremely explicit about mandatory multi-step approval workflow and when the tool must not be invoked, though no sibling alternatives are mentioned.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/ComplianceCow/cow-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server