Escalate Anything

by alexgaoth

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Hybrid

Report a wrong contact or fact

report_registry_problem

Flag an incorrect or dead URL, phone number, or fact in the registry so a person can review and correct the data.

Instructions

Record a wrong or dead URL, phone number or fact in the registry, so a person can fix the data. entity: company, regulator, state or rule id. location: e.g. 'channels.refund-form'.

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": {
      "entity": "<entity>",
      "problem": "<problem>"
    },
    "name": "report_registry_problem"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`entity`	Yes
`problem`	Yes
`location`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.2Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare a non-read-only, non-destructive, closed-world write. The description adds one genuinely useful behavioral fact beyond them: the call only records a report for a human to fix, it does not repair the data itself. It says nothing about idempotency, duplicates, or what state the report lands in.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the two non-obvious parameter clarifications. No filler or restatement of the tool name.

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 3-parameter, flat-object tool with an output schema, this covers the essentials: what to report, what an entity id looks like, and how to target a location. The only gap is guidance on what detail the 'problem' string should contain.

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 0%, so the description carries the full burden, and it does explain 'entity' (company, regulator, state or rule id) and give a concrete path-style example for 'location' ('channels.refund-form'), which the bare schema does not. 'problem' is left undefined, but its meaning is largely self-evident from the tool purpose.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Record a wrong or dead URL, phone number or fact in the registry') with concrete examples of what counts as a problem, and adds the intent 'so a person can fix the data'. It is distinguishable from siblings like case_open or list_issues, though it never names an alternative explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied: an agent must infer this is for when it encounters bad registry data during other work. There is no statement of when not to use it or which sibling handles related flows (e.g. case_open for escalation), leaving routing to inference.

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