Skip to main content
Glama
CronusL-1141

AI Team OS

by CronusL-1141
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

briefing_list

List Leader Briefing items pending review, then filter the decision queue by project, tag, or status to focus on relevant approvals.

Instructions

List Leader Briefing items. Default shows pending items for user review.

Each item carries project_id and tags, so a long decision queue can be narrowed to one project and/or one topic.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tagNoRestrict to items carrying this exact tag
statusNoFilter by status: pending / resolved / dismissed / expired (pending for 14 days without an answer) / allpending
project_idNoEmpty (default) lists this session's project plus items that carry no project (hooks and background checks raise those); in an unregistered directory, every project's items. A project id, or "current" for this session's project, lists only items stamped with that project.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.15.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / project_id / description
      Previous value: -"Restrict to one project. Empty (default) lists every\nproject's items — a decision inbox must not hide anything by\ndefault, and pre-2026-07-27 rows carry no project stamp at all.\nPass \"current\" for the project this session is working in."New value: +"Empty (default) lists this session's project plus\nitems that carry no project (hooks and background checks\nraise those); in an unregistered directory, every project's\nitems. A project id, or \"current\" for this session's\nproject, lists only items stamped with that project."
    • changedInput schema / properties / status / description
      Previous value: -"Filter by status: pending / resolved / dismissed / all"New value: +"Filter by status: pending / resolved / dismissed /\nexpired (pending for 14 days without an answer) / all"
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.11.2
    • addedInput schema / properties / project_id
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "",
+  "description": "Restrict to one project. Empty (default) lists every\nproject's items — a decision inbox must not hide anything by\ndefault, and pre-2026-07-27 rows carry no project stamp at all.\nPass \"current\" for the project this session is working in.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / tag
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "",
+  "description": "Restrict to items carrying this exact tag",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. First observedv1.9.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It usefully reveals the default pending-only filter and the shape of returned items (project_id and tags), but says nothing about ordering, pagination, or permission requirements for reading briefing items.

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?

Short and front-loaded: the verb/resource lead, followed by the default behavior and a note about item contents. Every sentence is relevant, though the second sentence leans on information the schema already provides.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the parameters are fully documented in the schema. Combined with the stated default behavior, the definition is complete enough for an agent to call the tool correctly; only cross-sibling routing guidance is thin.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents tag, status, and project_id in detail (including the 14-day expiry and "current" semantics). The description's "narrowed to one project and/or one topic" sentence is a light gloss that adds no detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 a specific verb and resource ("List Leader Briefing items") that an agent can act on directly. It does not, however, explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like briefing_add, briefing_resolve, or briefing_dismiss beyond the implicit list-vs-mutate distinction.

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 explains the default behavior ("Default shows pending items for user review") and hints at narrowing by project/tag, which implies usage. It never explicitly states when to use this tool versus briefing_resolve, briefing_dismiss, or the many other list_* siblings, so the guidance is only implied.

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