Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
covera-mcp

covera-mcp

Official
by SuresoftTechnologies
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Apply a server change

covera_recovery_publish
Destructive

Applies a verified recovery plan to the shared COVER server and connects its wrapper; confirm before running and provide the plan_digest from publish-plan.

Instructions

Apply a verified plan to the COVER server and connect the wrapper. This changes the shared COVER server, so confirm with the user first. Pass the plan_digest from covera_recovery_publish_plan. Needs COVER_ACCESS_KEY or cached credentials.

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": {
      "server": "<server>",
      "case": "<case>",
      "planDigest": "<planDigest>"
    },
    "name": "covera_recovery_publish"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
caseYesAbsolute path of the case directory (required).
serverYesCOVER server root URL (required).
verifyTlsNoVerify the HTTPS certificate (skipped by default).
planDigestYesplan_digest from publish-plan (required).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructive=true, openWorld=true, and idempotent=false. The description adds genuinely new context: the shared COVER server is mutated, user confirmation is required, and either COVER_ACCESS_KEY or cached credentials are needed. It stops short of describing failure behavior or the effect of re-running against an already-applied plan.

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, each carrying distinct information: the action, the confirmation requirement, the digest source, and the auth requirement. Nothing is redundant or buried.

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 destructive, non-idempotent, auth-gated operation with no output schema, the description covers the essentials an agent needs before calling: impact, confirmation, input provenance, and credentials. Only return/error expectations are left implicit.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all four parameters including verifyTls are already documented. The description only reinforces the plan_digest lineage, which the schema already states, and adds nothing about verifyTls or case semantics. Baseline 3 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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Apply a verified plan to the COVER server and connect the wrapper.' It also names the sibling tool that produces the required digest, so an agent can place it in the workflow without opening another schema.

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?

Clearly contextualizes when to use it: after a plan has been produced and verified, passing the plan_digest from covera_recovery_publish_plan. It adds a precondition ('confirm with the user first') but does not state when not to use it or what to do if the plan is stale/unverified.

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