Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
fluig-mcp

fluig-mcp

by alucardigo
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

fluig_process_available

List BPM processes the logged-in user can start, using an explicit test or production environment to avoid mixing homologation and live data.

Instructions

Lista os processos que o usuário logado pode INICIAR (getAvailableProcess).

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": {
      "env": "<env>"
    },
    "name": "fluig_process_available"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
envYesOBRIGATÓRIO. Ambiente alvo: "teste" (homologação, o host de FLUIG_HOST) ou "prod" (PRODUÇÃO REAL, o host de FLUIG_HOST_PROD). Não há default: a escolha é sempre explícita, para que ninguém leia homologação achando que é produção nem escreva em produção achando que é teste.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.3.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / env
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "OBRIGATÓRIO. Ambiente alvo: \"teste\" (homologação, o host de FLUIG_HOST) ou \"prod\" (PRODUÇÃO REAL, o host de FLUIG_HOST_PROD). Não há default: a escolha é sempre explícita, para que ninguém leia homologação achando que é produção nem escreva em produção achando que é teste.",
+  "enum": [
+    "teste",
+    "prod"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[]New value: +[
+  "env"
+]
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. 'Lista' signals a read-only operation, which is useful, but it does not disclose whether results are filtered by the session user's permissions, what the response contains, or any pagination/rate behavior. For a simple read with one parameter, this is adequate but not rich.

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?

One compact sentence with the key scope qualifier ('pode INICIAR') front-loaded and no filler. It is appropriately terse for a single-parameter list tool, though it leaves no room for any additional guidance.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should say something about what is returned (e.g., process IDs/names, whether card form info is included). It covers env indirectly via the schema and the read nature via 'Lista', but the return shape is a notable gap for a list tool.

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% and the single 'env' parameter is fully documented in the schema, including enum values and the rationale for having no default. The description adds nothing about parameters, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Lista') and resource ('os processos'), with a meaningful scope qualifier: only processes the logged-in user can START. The parenthetical API name (getAvailableProcess) reinforces the intent. It does not explicitly contrast with close siblings such as fluig_process_available_users_start or fluig_process_start, but the 'INICIAR' scoping makes the distinction inferable.

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 implied: call this to discover which processes are startable before invoking fluig_process_start. However, there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not, no mention of the alternative tools (fluig_process_available_users_start, fluig_process_search), and no prerequisite guidance beyond what the schema says about env.

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