lightbulb-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

software_spot_weld_fix

Request a bounded urgent fix for production or cloud issues through a controlled approval workflow. Opens a pull request and preview by default, leaving deployment off for safe review.

Instructions

Request a bounded urgent production/cloud fix through the Lightbulb loop.

Defaults are intentionally conservative: preview mode on, PR on, deploy off. Production or cloud-impacting fixes are routed with approval gates and CloudOps/deployment context rather than direct mutation.

Args: coding_harness: Required when this request starts a new consulting project. Choose codex, claude_code, or chatgpt; additional harnesses can be added later.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`scope`	No	code
`open_pr`	No
`request`	Yes
`severity`	No	high
`auto_push`	No
`repository`	No
`environment`	No	staging
`github_repo`	No
`project_key`	No
`extra_inputs`	No	{}
`github_owner`	No
`preview_mode`	No
`workspace_id`	Yes
`coding_harness`	No
`trigger_deploy`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.1Sep 7, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / coding_harness
```
Added value: +{
+  "default": "",
+  "title": "Coding Harness",
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
First observedv0.1.0Jun 25, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description discloses key behavioral traits: it is a request (not direct mutation), defaults to preview mode and PR creation, disables deploy, and routes production/cloud changes through approval gates. This gives meaningful transparency about safety and side effects, but doesn't detail all possible behaviors or side effects.

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 concise, consisting of three short sentences. It front-loads the purpose and then provides important default and routing context, without unnecessary verbosity.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (15 parameters, 2 required, no annotations, and no output schema description), the description is insufficient for an agent to fully understand how to use it. It omits explanations of required parameters, many optional ones, and expected outcomes, leaving significant gaps.

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

Parameters2/5

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

The schema has 15 parameters with zero descriptions, and the description only vaguely references preview mode, PR, and deploy defaults without mapping to specific fields. Most parameters like repository, environment, coding_harness, and extra_inputs are unexplained, so the description adds minimal semantic meaning 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 tool's purpose: requesting a bounded urgent production/cloud fix via the Lightbulb loop. It conveys a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from unrelated sibling tools, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It provides some guidance by noting that production/cloud fixes are routed with approval gates and that defaults are conservative, implying use for urgent bounded fixes. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this over alternatives or provide exclusions, so usage guidance is only partially covered.

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

Deploy Server