agent-governance MCP server
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| prompts | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| resources | {
"subscribe": false,
"listChanged": false
} |
| experimental | {} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| read_issueC | Read one issue from the tracker. |
| read_digestC | Read the current team digest. |
| draft_updateB | Draft a status update. Produces text; writes nothing to a system of record. |
| propose_issue_noteA | Propose an issue note. Applies only after a human consents; cannot set an owner, due date or status. |
| read_ledgerC | Read the ledger of work absorbed per agent. |
| read_audit_logB | Read this run's decision audit log. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 6 tools
The four read_* tools each target a clearly distinct resource (issue, digest, ledger, audit log), so reads are unambiguous. draft_update and propose_issue_note are the only pair with mild overlap (both produce content concerning updates/notes), but the 'writes nothing' vs 'gated write' distinction is spelled out. An agent can reliably pick the right tool.
Every tool follows a clean verb_noun snake_case pattern: read_issue, read_digest, read_ledger, read_audit_log, draft_update, propose_issue_note. The verb set (read/draft/propose) maps predictably to the side-effect class of each tool.
Six tools is well-scoped for a governance/oversight server, and each tool has a distinct, non-redundant role. Nothing feels padded or missing at the count level.
The surface covers reading state and proposing changes, but there is no way to list issues (only read a single one), check the status of a submitted proposal, or follow a proposal through to resolution. These are notable gaps for an oversight workflow, though the read-plus-propose design is deliberately human-gated.