moxie-mcp

approve_deliverable

Approve a deliverable that is awaiting approval in a project's Kanban workflow by specifying client, project, and deliverable names.

Instructions

Approve a deliverable/task that is in Client Workflow / Approval status in the Project Kanban

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": {
      "clientName": "<clientName>",
      "projectName": "<projectName>",
      "deliverableName": "<deliverableName>"
    },
    "name": "approve_deliverable"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`clientName`	Yes	Exact match of the client name
`projectName`	Yes	Exact match of the project name
`deliverableName`	Yes	Exact match of the deliverable/task name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.0.0Jul 28, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action without explaining side effects, reversibility, permissions, or what happens after approval.

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?

Single sentence that front-loads the action and resource. Every word adds value; no redundancy.

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?

The tool is simple with 3 string params and no output schema. The description covers purpose and precondition but lacks behavioral context. It is minimally adequate but could be more complete.

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% with clear descriptions like 'Exact match of...'. The description adds no extra parameter meaning beyond the action, so baseline score applies.

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 specifies the verb 'approve' and the resource 'deliverable/task' with a specific context ('in Client Workflow / Approval status in the Project Kanban'). It distinguishes from siblings as no other tool covers approval.

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?

The description implies when to use by requiring the deliverable to be in 'Client Workflow / Approval status'. It does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternatives, but the precondition is useful.

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