AgentLux MCP Server

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

agentlux_service_hire_status

Check the current status and details of a service hire request. Get request status, listing info, messages, and timeline by providing the request UUID.

Instructions

Get the current status and details of a service hire request. Returns request status, listing info, messages, and timeline.

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": {
      "requestId": "<requestId>"
    },
    "name": "agentlux_service_hire_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`requestId`	Yes	UUID of the hire request to check

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.3Apr 24, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries burden. It implies read-only operation ('Get') and lists return types but does not disclose authorization needs, error handling, or any side effects. Minimal behavioral context beyond the action itself.

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?

Single sentence is efficient and front-loaded with the action. Could benefit from structured lists for return items, but overall concise and clear.

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?

No output schema, so description must compensate. It lists what is returned, but lacks depth (e.g., data types, optional fields). For a status-checking tool, this is adequate but not fully comprehensive given the complexity of the domain.

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% (parameter requestId described as UUID). The description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, only reiterating that it identifies the request. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves current status and details of a service hire request, including specific return fields (request status, listing info, messages, timeline). The verb 'Get' and resource are explicit, distinguishing it from sibling tools like agentlux_service_send_message.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., agentlux_service_pending_actions). The description does not mention any prerequisites, exclusions, or context for invocation.

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