Mipiti MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Set Functional Satisfaction Groups

set_functional_satisfaction_groups

Replace a functional objective's satisfaction groups by submitting grouped functional-test IDs, so the objective is considered satisfied when any complete group passes and ungrouped tests stay assigned.

Instructions

Declaratively set (replace) a functional objective's satisfaction groups. Mutating.

Replaces the objective's group structure wholesale. Each group is a set of functional tests that together satisfy the objective (AND within a group); the objective counts as satisfied when any one complete group has all its tests verified (OR across groups). Tests you want to keep associated with the objective but outside any group go in ungrouped. Unlike set_control_assumption_groups, there is no AI relevance gate — the structure you submit is applied as-is. Read the current state first with get_functional_satisfaction_groups.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`model_id`	Yes	ID of the threat model.
`ungrouped`	No	Comma-separated functional-test ids to keep associated with the objective but unassigned to any group (optional).
`groups_json`	Yes	JSON object mapping group label to a list of functional test ids, e.g. ``{"1": ["FT-1", "FT-2"], "2": ["FT-3"]}``. Pass ``{}`` to clear all groups.
`server_version`	Yes
`functional_objective_id`	Yes	The objective whose groups to set.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.66.0Aug 5, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / groups_json / description

Previous value: -"A JSON object mapping group label to a list of functional\ntest ids, e.g. ``{\"1\": [\"FT-1\", \"FT-2\"], \"2\": [\"FT-3\"]}``."New value: +"JSON object mapping group label to a list of functional test ids, e.g. ``{\"1\": [\"FT-1\", \"FT-2\"], \"2\": [\"FT-3\"]}``. Pass ``{}`` to clear all groups."

changedInput schema / properties / ungrouped / description

Previous value: -"Comma-separated functional-test ids to keep unassigned to any\ngroup (optional)."New value: +"Comma-separated functional-test ids to keep associated with the objective but unassigned to any group (optional)."

Addedv0.62.2Jul 22, 2026
Removedv0.62.0Jul 17, 2026
First observedv0.57.0Jul 8, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and delivers: 'Mutating' and 'Replaces the objective's group structure wholesale' clearly disclose the destructive behavior. It also explains the AND-within-group/OR-across-groups semantics and that the submitted structure is applied as-is, giving an agent a complete behavioral profile.

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?

Four sentences with zero redundancy: mutation flag, wholesale replacement, group semantics, ungrouped explanation, sibling contrast, and a read-first tip. The verb and resource are front-loaded, and each sentence earns its place.

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?

The tool's behavioral complexity is fully covered: semantics, destructive replace behavior, ungrouped handling, and the distinction from set_control_assumption_groups. An output schema exists, so return-value details are unnecessary. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to invoke this tool correctly.

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 80%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining the purpose of the ungrouped parameter ('keep associated with the objective but outside any group') and clarifying the group semantics: a group is a set of tests that together satisfy the objective, and any complete group suffices. This goes beyond the schema's JSON shape and examples.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb-resource pair, 'Declaratively set (replace) a functional objective's satisfaction groups,' and signals 'Mutating.' It also explicitly distinguishes itself from set_control_assumption_groups by noting the absence of an AI relevance gate, which differentiates it from its closest sibling.

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?

The description gives explicit guidance to read the current state first with get_functional_satisfaction_groups, and contrasts this tool with set_control_assumption_groups ('no AI relevance gate — the structure you submit is applied as-is'). This establishes when to choose this tool over the sibling without ambiguity.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server