Skip to main content
Glama

laserfiche_task_wait

Wait for an async operation to reach a terminal state with configurable polling and timeout, returning the final status or a timed-out indicator.

Instructions

Block until an async operation reaches a terminal state.

Preferred over manual polling with get_task_status. Returns quickly when the op is fast; otherwise polls at poll_interval_seconds until Completed, Failed, or Canceled — or until timeout_seconds is reached, in which case the last observed status is returned with timed_out=true so the caller can decide whether to keep waiting.

Args: operation_token: Token from the originating async tool. timeout_seconds: Maximum time to wait (default 60). Set higher for large folder deletes or large copies. poll_interval_seconds: Delay between status checks (default 1.0). Bounded below at 0.1s.

Returns: Same payload as get_task_status, with an added timed_out boolean indicating whether the wait ended on timeout.

On failure: if a poll call fails mid-wait, returns {"mode": "error", "error": <slug>, "operation_token": <str>, ...}. Common slugs: not_found (token invalidated by server restart), auth_failed.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
operation_tokenYesOperation token returned by an async tool (delete_entry, copy_entry, occasionally import_document). Server-scoped; tokens from a different server instance won't resolve.
timeout_secondsNoMaximum time to wait. Set higher for large folder deletes or large copies. Returns the last observed status with timed_out=True if the deadline is reached.
poll_interval_secondsNoDelay between status checks. Bounded below at 0.1s.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: blocking, polling interval, timeout handling, return payload with timed_out flag, and error scenarios with common slugs like not_found and auth_failed.

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 well-structured with a summary line followed by details, Args, Returns, and On failure sections. It is slightly verbose but each sentence adds value and information is front-loaded.

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 the output schema exists, the description adequately covers the tool's behavior, return value (same as get_task_status plus timed_out), and error handling. All parameters are explained with use-case guidance, making it complete for agent invocation.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The schema covers all parameters with descriptions and examples, and the description adds practical guidance (e.g., higher timeout for large deletes) and bounds clarification for poll_interval, going beyond the schema alone.

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 blocks until an async operation reaches a terminal state and explicitly distinguishes it from manual polling using get_task_status, providing a specific verb-resource pair with clear scope.

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 recommends this tool over manual polling with get_task_status and provides context for increasing timeout for large operations, but does not explicitly differentiate from other sibling wait tools like wait_for_task or task_wait_or_poll.

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/SamuelSHernandez/laserfiche-mcp'

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