Skip to main content
Glama

satisfy_gate

Destructive

Mark gate conditions as satisfied with evidence, such as confirming PR threads are checked, storing verification for 5 minutes.

Instructions

Satisfy a gate condition (e.g., after checking PR threads). Evidence is stored with a 5-minute TTL.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
gateYesGate condition ID to satisfy (e.g., pr_threads_checked)
evidenceNoEvidence text (e.g., "0 unresolved threads")

Implementation Reference

  • The core function that satisfies a gate by updating the gate state in a local file.
    function satisfyCondition(conditionId, evidence) {
      const state = loadState();
      state[conditionId] = {
        timestamp: Date.now(),
        evidence: evidence || '',
      };
      saveState(state);
      return state[conditionId];
    }
  • MCP tool handler for satisfy_gate, which calls the satisfyCondition utility.
    case 'satisfy_gate': {
      if (!args.gate) {
        throw new Error('gate is required');
      }
      const entry = satisfyCondition(args.gate, args.evidence || '');
      return toTextResult({
        satisfied: true,
        gate: args.gate,
        ...entry,
      });
    }
Behavior4/5

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

The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: it specifies that evidence is stored with a 5-minute TTL, which is not covered by the destructiveHint annotation. This disclosure of data retention behavior enhances transparency, though it could mention more about the destructive nature implied by the annotation.

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?

The description is highly concise and front-loaded, consisting of two sentences that directly state the purpose and key behavioral trait (TTL). Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it efficient and well-structured.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (2 parameters, destructiveHint annotation, no output schema), the description is adequate but has gaps. It covers the action and TTL, but lacks details on return values, error handling, or how it integrates with sibling tools, leaving some context incomplete for an agent.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the input schema already documents both parameters ('gate' and 'evidence') fully. The description adds minimal semantics by implying usage context (e.g., 'after checking PR threads'), but doesn't provide additional details on parameter meaning or constraints beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the action ('satisfy a gate condition') and resource ('gate condition'), with an example ('e.g., after checking PR threads') that provides context. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'gate_stats' or 'complete_handoff', which might involve gate-related operations.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides minimal guidance with the example ('e.g., after checking PR threads'), implying usage after certain checks, but lacks explicit when-to-use rules, prerequisites, or alternatives compared to siblings like 'gate_stats' or 'complete_handoff'. No exclusions or clear context are stated.

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/IgorGanapolsky/mcp-memory-gateway'

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