Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
callgraph

callgraph

by GeRiY
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

next

Run a suggested follow-up step by its number from a result's suggestion line instead of composing the call manually. Provide the result ID and one or more choice numbers.

Instructions

Run a suggested next step by its number instead of composing the call: some results end with ↪ r7 possible next: [1] … [2] … (only when the server runs with --next). Use it only if a suggestion fits your task; otherwise ignore the line. Example: {"result_id": "r7", "choice": 1} or {"result_id": "r7", "choice": [1, 3]}. Ids are per project and expire after 24 hours.

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": {
      "result_id": "<result_id>",
      "choice": "<choice>"
    },
    "name": "next"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
choiceYesWhich suggestion(s): `1`, `"1"`, `"1,3"` or `[1, 3]`.
projectNoRegistered project alias (the one the result came from); default: the server's working directory.
result_idYesThe result id from the `↪ rN …` line, e.g. `"r7"`.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.9.3

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the availability gate (`--next` flag), that result ids are scoped per project, and that they expire after 24 hours. Undisclosed is what happens on an expired/stale id (error shape) and whether the executed step may mutate state — the suggestion could be any operation.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Front-loaded with the core action, then the condition for use, then worked examples, then the operational constraints (project scope, 24h expiry). Every sentence adds information; nothing is restated from the name.

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 tool that re-dispatches arbitrary suggested operations with no annotations and no output schema, the definition covers the trigger format, applicability gate, id scoping and expiry. It leaves the failure mode on expired ids and the state-changing nature of replayed steps undocumented.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning by showing concrete payloads and a multi-selection case (`[1, 3]`), tying `result_id` to the id printed in the `↪ rN` line, and noting project scoping. Still no note on whether `choice` supports the comma-string form the schema allows.

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 action: run a numbered suggestion emitted in a `↪ r7 possible next: [1] … [2]` line rather than composing the call yourself. That verb-plus-mechanism is unambiguous and an agent can recognize the trigger text in prior output. It stops short of naming a sibling it is distinct from, so it isn't a 5.

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?

Explicit positive condition ("Use it only if a suggestion fits your task") with an explicit negative ("otherwise ignore the line"). The precondition that the server must run with `--next` is spelled out, so the agent knows when this tool is even applicable.

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