Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
fluig-mcp

fluig-mcp

by alucardigo
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

fluig_process_image

Retrieves the BPM process flow image for a specified process ID and environment (test or production), returning a URL or base64 string.

Instructions

Retorna a imagem do fluxo do processo (getProcessImage) — string (URL/base64 conforme servidor).

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": {
      "processId": "<processId>",
      "env": "<env>"
    },
    "name": "fluig_process_image"
  }
}

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.
processIdYesCOD_DEF_PROCES

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 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 / properties / processId / description
      Previous value: -"Process id."New value: +"COD_DEF_PROCES"
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "processId"
-]New value: +[
+  "processId",
+  "env"
+]
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does add one genuinely useful disclosure — the return is a string that may be a URL or base64 depending on the server — but says nothing about permission requirements, error behavior for invalid/unreleased processIds, or how the caller should detect which format came back.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler: purpose, backing API, and return type. Appropriately sized, though it is arguably under-specified rather than truly concise.

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?

With only 2 required params, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is close to minimally adequate. The return-type note is valuable precisely because there is no output schema, but the ambiguity between URL and base64 is left unresolved for the caller.

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% and the env parameter is documented thoroughly in-schema (test vs. production host, no default), so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, though processId (COD_DEF_PROCES) is at least named in the tool name context.

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?

Clear specific verb + resource: "Retorna a imagem do fluxo do processo", with the underlying API name (getProcessImage) in parentheses. An agent can tell it fetches a rendered flow image, but the description never differentiates it from the very close sibling fluig_process_diagram_get, which likely overlaps heavily.

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 versus fluig_process_diagram_get, fluig_process_export_xml, or fluig_process_def_states. No prerequisites (e.g. whether the process must be deployed or the requesting user needs visibility rights) and no note that the call is read-only.

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