Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
AIR MCP Server

AIR MCP Server

by VericyIO
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Wait for assessment

air_wait_for_assessment
Read-only

Waits for an assessment to finish, fail, produce a report, or move to a new step, using backoff. Returns the current stage line and report URL so you can update the person and keep polling.

Instructions

Wait until an assessment is completed, failed, or reportAvailable, or until its step differs from lastStageLabel, up to timeoutMs. Uses exponential backoff. A new step returns ready:false with stageLabel ("Step 4 of 12: Checking each risk theme"), the line to show the person, and reportUrl. Call again with lastStageLabel set to the line you showed. Returns ready:false with the last observed status if the wait budget runs out — call again to keep waiting. Requires assessments:read.

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": {
      "assessmentPid": "<assessmentPid>"
    },
    "name": "air_wait_for_assessment"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
timeoutMsNoDefault 1800000ms; max 1800000ms
assessmentPidYes
lastStageLabelNoThe step line you last showed the person; omit on the first wait

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.4
    • addedInput schema / properties / lastStageLabel
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The step line you last showed the person; omit on the first wait",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.0.2
    • changedInput schema / properties / timeoutMs / description
      Previous value: -"Default 1800000ms"New value: +"Default 1800000ms; max 1800000ms"
    • addedInput schema / properties / timeoutMs / maximum
      Added value: +1800000
  3. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only and non-destructive behavior, and the description adds useful operational context: exponential backoff, timeout budget behavior, the assessments:read requirement, and the ready:false continuation pattern. It does not fully spell out the terminal ready:true return shape, but it adds substantial behavior beyond the annotations.

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 front-loaded with the terminal conditions and then explains the step-change continuation behavior. The example stage label is useful, and every sentence contributes to correct invocation without being redundant.

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 an asynchronous wait tool with no output schema, the description covers the important invocation loop, timeout behavior, step continuation, auth requirement, and partial return shape. It is nearly complete, though it could explicitly describe the terminal success return.

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?

Schema coverage is 67%, so the schema already documents timeoutMs and lastStageLabel partially. The description adds the key polling semantics for lastStageLabel, including that it should be set to the line previously shown and omitted on the first wait. assessmentPid is not explained, but its purpose is evident from the tool name.

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 states a specific verb and resource: wait for an assessment until completion, failure, report availability, or a step change. It also makes the polling intent clear by explaining the continuation pattern with lastStageLabel. An agent can tell this is a long-running wait tool rather than a simple fetch tool.

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 clearly explains when to call it and how to continue waiting after a timeout or step change. It does not explicitly compare against alternatives such as air_get_assessment, but the usage context is sufficiently clear for an agent.

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