Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
warp-mcp

warp-mcp

by Ringer
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Auto-fix port-in errors

port_auto_fix

Apply TNIQ auto-fixes to porting errors, scoping to specific error groups or phone numbers when needed, then revalidate or resubmit the port request.

Instructions

Apply TNIQ auto-fixes to the project, optionally scoped to one error group (from port_get_error_groups) or a TN subset. After fixing, run port_revalidate_tns or port_resubmit_request as appropriate. Errors: NOT_FOUND, TNIQ_ERROR.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

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

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesPort request UUID (from port_list_requests or port_create_request)
tnsNoOptional subset of 10-digit TNs to fix; omit to fix all affected TNs
error_group_idNoError group ID (from port_get_error_groups) to scope the fix to

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.2

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations are all false, providing no hints. Description implies mutation but lacks details on side effects, idempotency, or safety of retrying. Only errors are listed, not behavioral outcomes.

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?

Two sentences plus error list, front-loaded with action, no fluff. Every sentence adds value.

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

Completeness3/5

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

With no output schema, description should mention return value or confirmation. It covers purpose and follow-up but lacks details on prerequisites, synchronous/asynchronous behavior, and what the tool returns.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds minor context (error_group_id from port_get_error_groups) but largely restates schema parameter descriptions.

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?

Clearly states 'Apply TNIQ auto-fixes to the project' with optional scoping to error group or TN subset, distinguishing it from sibling tools like port_get_error_groups and port_resubmit_request.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explicitly mentions optional scoping and recommends follow-up tools (port_revalidate_tns or port_resubmit_request), but does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to alternatives.

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