Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
agentic-orchestrator MCP server

agentic-orchestrator MCP server

by Saul4432
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

run_task

Execute a goal through a multi-agent planner, specialist, and critic loop, with human approval required for sensitive actions.

Instructions

Run a goal through the multi-agent orchestrator (planner → specialists with tools → critic loop). Sensitive actions are held for human approval, never auto-executed.

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": {
      "goal": "<goal>"
    },
    "name": "run_task"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
goalYesThe task to accomplish

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It describes the orchestration process and the safety hold for sensitive actions but lacks details on failure modes, side effects, or performance implications.

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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, and contains no wasted words. It effectively communicates the tool's function and key safety feature.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (multi-agent orchestrator) and lack of output schema, the description covers the pipeline and safety mechanism well. It could mention what the tool returns (e.g., a trace) but is otherwise 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% for the single 'goal' parameter, so baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional semantics beyond the schema's 'The task to accomplish'.

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 runs a goal through a multi-agent orchestrator with a specific pipeline (planner, specialists, critic). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_trace' and 'get_metrics', which are retrieval tools.

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 provides clear context on when to use the tool, including that sensitive actions require human approval. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or suggest 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