Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ThriftyRelay

ThriftyRelay

by Roseu7
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

Open Approval Card

open_approval
Read-only

Displays the approval card for a pending task flagged APPROVAL_REQUIRED so the user can review and approve it; nothing executes from this call.

Instructions

Show the approval card for a pending task. Use only when remote_task answered APPROVAL_REQUIRED with a task id; never proactively. Nothing executes from this call; the user approves in the card.

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": {
      "task_id": "<task_id>"
    },
    "name": "open_approval"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
task_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.1

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds real value by clarifying that this call only renders the card and that the actual approval happens user-side. It stops short of covering failure behavior, such as what happens with a stale or unknown task_id.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action, then the trigger condition, then the side-effect clarification. No filler or repetition.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a single-parameter, read-only display tool with no output schema, the description covers trigger, source of the id, and the fact that nothing executes. Minor gaps remain around invalid/stale task ids and what the card render implies for follow-up calls.

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 0%, so the description must carry the burden; it does partially by identifying where task_id comes from (the remote_task APPROVAL_REQUIRED response). However, it does not restate or explain the required 'task_...' pattern or format, leaving the schema's regex as the only specification.

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 ('Show the approval card') scoped to a 'pending task', which cleanly separates it from approve_task, decline_task, and pending_approvals. An agent can tell what this does 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 both a positive trigger (remote_task answered APPROVAL_REQUIRED with a task id) and an explicit prohibition ('never proactively'), naming the sibling that produces the precondition. This is the strongest form of routing guidance.

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