Skip to main content
Glama
alxshelepenok

Grove

by alxshelepenok
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Hybrid

Set node attribute

set

Apply a guarded transition to a node's scalar attribute, rejecting illegal changes with reason and pointer to definition of ready.

Instructions

Apply one guarded transition of a scalar attribute on a node: status, cynefin, type, title, fitness_kind, fitness_target, area or requires_coverage. Illegal transitions (a status skip, a work item whose DoR is not met) are rejected with the reason and a pointer to dor; success is silent. For list-valued fields such as ac or evidence use field.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYestarget node id, e.g. W-12, G-03 or D-40
keyYesattribute key: status|cynefin|type|title|fitness_kind|fitness_target|area|requires_coverage
valueYesnew value for the attribute key

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.2.1
    • changedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Previous value: -"node id"New value: +"target node id, e.g. W-12, G-03 or D-40"
    • changedInput schema / properties / value / description
      Previous value: -"new value"New value: +"new value for the attribute key"
  2. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With all annotations set to false, the description carries the full burden, and it delivers: it discloses that transitions are guarded, that illegal transitions are rejected with a reason and pointer to 'dor', and that success is silent. This is meaningful behavioral context beyond the structured hints.

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 dense sentences with no filler: the first defines scope and allowed keys, the second defines failure and success behavior plus the sibling to use for lists. Every phrase contributes.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema, the description still explains the response semantics: silent success and error payloads containing a reason and a dor pointer. It also scopes the tool to scalar attributes and redirects list-valued mutations, making it complete enough for correct invocation.

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%, so the schema already documents id, key, and value. The description adds useful context like example node IDs (W-12, G-03, D-40) and the scalar-vs-list distinction, but it does not substantially redefine parameter meanings beyond what the schema provides.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Apply one guarded transition of a scalar attribute on a node,' and enumerates the exact accepted attribute keys. It also distinguishes itself from 'field' by explicitly naming list-valued fields as out of scope.

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?

It clearly states that list-valued fields such as 'ac' or 'evidence' should use 'field' instead, which is an explicit alternative. It could further contrast with transition-oriented siblings like 'promote' or 'ready', but the guidance given is sufficient for the primary decision.

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