Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
said-done

said-done

by Jimmy2004
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

setup_status

Reports observable configuration milestones during said-done setup so you can confirm completed steps and identify what remains, without claiming tests or daemon installation.

Instructions

Report observable configuration milestones; do not claim tests or daemon installation.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "setup_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose one real behavioral trait: results are limited to what is externally observable, so the agent must not infer passing tests or a running daemon. It never states that the call is read-only, what milestones are checked, or what a response contains, so it is useful but incomplete.

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?

A single short sentence with no filler, and the primary action is front-loaded before the caveat. Nothing could be removed without losing content.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description is the only source of information about what this tool returns, and it never enumerates the milestones or response shape. For a status tool whose entire value is the returned state, an agent cannot predict the output well enough to plan around it.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate and the baseline of 4 applies. Schema coverage is 100% and the empty argument object is self-explanatory.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a reporting verb and a resource ('configuration milestones'), which signals a status-report tool, but 'observable configuration milestones' is jargon that never says concretely what is read back. It does not differentiate itself from close siblings like status, credential_status, source_status, or get_setup_guide, so an agent must guess which status tool it wants.

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 only guidance is the negative constraint 'do not claim tests or daemon installation', which governs how to report rather than when to call this tool. There is no statement of when to prefer it over get_setup_guide, setup_begin, or the other status tools, and no preconditions are given.

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