PXE200 SA MCP

by apiwat59

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

Report Edit Item

report_edit_item

Updates or deletes a report item by 1-based index; change label, note, result, or limit, or remove the item.

Instructions

Edit label/note/result/limit of a report item, or delete it.

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": {
      "index": "<index>"
    },
    "name": "report_edit_item"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`note`	No
`index`	Yes	1-based item index from report_status
`label`	No
`limit`	No	Spec/limit text e.g. '<= 30 dBm'
`delete`	No
`result`	No	PASS \| FAIL \| INFO \| '' to clear

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 20, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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 for a mutating tool. It does not say whether delete is irreversible, whether it overrides the other fields when combined, whether omitted/null fields are left unchanged or cleared, or what permissions are needed.

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 short sentence that front-loads the edit operation and appends the delete case. No filler, though the terseness borders on under-specification for a six-parameter mutation tool.

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

Completeness2/5

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

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. However, for a tool that can destroy a report item with no annotations and only 50% schema coverage, the description omits critical interaction rules (delete vs. edit precedence, unchanged-field behavior), leaving the agent under-informed.

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 50%: index, limit and result are self-documented in the schema, while label, note and delete have no descriptions. The description adds the field-to-parameter mapping but does not clarify semantics like using '' to clear a result or null meaning 'no change', so it neither compensates fully nor is empty.

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 ('Edit') plus the resource ('report item') and enumerates the editable fields (label/note/result/limit), while also disclosing the delete capability. An agent can distinguish this from report_add_note or report_set_info, though the description never names those siblings explicitly.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives such as report_set_info or report_add_note. The only contextual hook, that 'index' comes from report_status, lives in the schema rather than the description, so routing is left entirely to inference.

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