Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Jubstaaa

standup-mr

by Jubstaaa
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Post standup note

post_standup_note

Sends a finished standup note to a Slack, Discord, or Google Chat webhook so the team sees the update. Only post a note the user approved.

Instructions

Posts a finished standup note to a chat webhook. This one has a side effect: it sends a message other people will see, so only call it on a note the user has agreed to send.

The webhook URL is read from STANDUP_WEBHOOK_URL, never from an argument — a webhook URL is a credential, since anyone holding it can post to the channel. Slack and Discord payload shapes are supported; the shape is inferred from the URL host, and kind is only needed for a proxied or self-hosted endpoint whose host gives nothing away — Mattermost and Rocket.Chat take the slack shape. A missing URL, an unrecognised host, or a webhook that rejects the message comes back as an error rather than a silent success.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindNoWhich payload shape to send: slack and google-chat post {"text"}, discord posts {"content"}. Omit it — the shape is inferred from the webhook host. Pass it only when the host is not recognisable, e.g. a proxy in front of the real webhook.
textYesThe note to post, as the chat should render it. Slack and Discord both take Markdown, so send the written note rather than the raw JSON from get_standup_data.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.4.3
    • changedInput schema / properties / kind / description
      Previous value: -"Which payload shape to send: slack posts {\"text\"}, discord posts {\"content\"}. Omit it — the shape is inferred from the webhook host. Pass it only when the host is not recognisable, e.g. a proxy in front of the real webhook."New value: +"Which payload shape to send: slack and google-chat post {\"text\"}, discord posts {\"content\"}. Omit it — the shape is inferred from the webhook host. Pass it only when the host is not recognisable, e.g. a proxy in front of the real webhook."
    • changedInput schema / properties / kind / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "slack",
-  "discord"
-]New value: +[
+  "slack",
+  "discord",
+  "google-chat"
+]
  2. Addedv0.4.2

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the mutation/open-world/non-idempotent profile, but the description adds real context on top: the message is publicly visible, the webhook URL is a credential read from STANDUP_WEBHOOK_URL and deliberately not an argument, host-based payload inference, and that failures surface as errors rather than silent success. Only rate limits or partial-failure semantics are left unstated.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The safety-critical side effect is front-loaded in the first sentence, which is exactly right. The second paragraph is dense with parentheticals about Mattermost/Rocket.Chat and proxy hosts, but each clause carries real operational information, so nothing is wasted — only mildly over-packed.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a two-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers consent, credential sourcing, payload-shape inference, and the failure mode. Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing, and return-format detail is unnecessary since there is no output schema.

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 the non-obvious semantic that the webhook endpoint is not a parameter at all and comes from an environment variable, plus the rationale for `kind` being optional. That is genuine meaning beyond the schema text.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Posts a finished standup note to a chat webhook') and implicitly contrasts with sibling get_standup_data by telling the agent to send the written note rather than its raw JSON. An agent can tell this is the outbound/send step of the workflow without opening the schema.

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?

Gives an explicit permission gate ('only call it on a note the user has agreed to send') and an explicit conditional for the one optional parameter ('pass it only when the host is not recognisable'). The when-to-use and when-not-to-use conditions are both stated rather than left to inference.

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