Skip to main content
Glama
ProSuite

prosuite-mcp

Official
by ProSuite

preview_condition_run

Run a single proposed condition against your data to see actual flagged issues before adding it to a specification.

Instructions

Run a single proposed condition ad-hoc and show what it actually flags.

Tier-2 confirmation for spec authoring: add_condition_to_spec only confirms a condition builds and references an existing descriptor. This runs it for real against model_catalog_path and returns the same engine-confirmed summary as run_verification (engine_confirmed, total_errors, sample_features with the actual flagged issues), so a proposed condition can be judged by what it flags before it's merged into a spec. Scope envelope to a small extent to keep this a preview, not a full run.

Args: model_catalog_path: Workspace path on the server, e.g. 'C:/data/mydb.gdb' or a .sde connection file. condition_request: {condition: method name from list_conditions, params: dict}. datasets: Feature classes/tables used by condition_request, each with 'name' and an optional 'filter_expression'. workspace_id: Logical name for the data model (arbitrary, used in generated condition names). output_dir: Optional server-side directory for Issues.gdb and HTML report. Omitted, a local runs/ directory is used only when PROSUITE_HOST is local, since the service resolves the path. envelope: Optional spatial filter {x_min, y_min, x_max, y_max}.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
datasetsYes
envelopeNo
output_dirNo
workspace_idYes
condition_requestYes
model_catalog_pathYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses that this runs the condition for real, returns engine-confirmed summary like run_verification, and describes output_dir behavior based on local vs server. This adds significant behavioral context beyond the schema.

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 description is front-loaded with purpose and guidelines, then uses a bulleted 'Args' section for parameters. While slightly verbose, every sentence adds value; the structure aids readability.

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?

Given no annotations, 6 parameters, and an output schema (not shown), the description comprehensively covers purpose, usage, parameters, and return value (referencing run_verification output). It leaves minimal gaps for the agent to infer.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides detailed explanations for all 6 parameters, including path examples, the structure of condition_request, envelope format, and output_dir behavior. This far exceeds minimal requirements.

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 clearly states the tool runs a proposed condition ad-hoc and shows what it flags. It distinguishes itself from add_condition_to_spec (which only confirms build/descriptor) and run_verification (which runs full verification), establishing a unique purpose as a preview tool.

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 explicitly says this is 'Tier-2 confirmation for spec authoring' to be used after add_condition_to_spec, and contrasts with run_verification. It advises to scope envelope to keep it a preview, providing clear when-to-use and limitations.

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/ProSuite/prosuite-mcp'

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