Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ragic-mcp

ragic-mcp

by EthanH9977
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

ragic_lock

Lock a specific record in your Ragic database to prevent any further edits and preserve data integrity.

Instructions

Lock a record to prevent further edits.

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": {
      "path": "<path>",
      "sheet_index": "<sheet_index>",
      "record_id": "<record_id>"
    },
    "name": "ragic_lock"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYes
record_idYes
sheet_indexYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states the immediate effect ('prevent further edits') but does not disclose side effects, permissions needed, or behavior if the record is already locked.

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?

One short sentence is concise, but it omits critical information that should be present. It is not well-structured for completeness.

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?

Given three parameters and no annotations or output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on parameter formats, prerequisites, and behavioral context.

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% and the description adds no information about the three required parameters ('path', 'record_id', 'sheet_index'). The agent has no guidance on what values to pass.

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 clearly states the action ('Lock'), the resource ('a record'), and the effect ('prevent further edits'). It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'ragic_unlock' by implication.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use or when not to use this tool versus alternatives like 'ragic_unlock' or 'ragic_approve'. Usage is implied but not stated.

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