Skip to main content
Glama

ck_review_submit

Submit a plan, diff, or completion packet for human review and execution gating. Creates a review record and returns a review_id and browser URL for approval or denial.

Instructions

Submit a governed plan, diff, or completion packet for human review and execution gating. Write operation — creates a review record and returns a review_id and browser URL. review_type controls what is being submitted: plan (before implementation), diff (before merging), or completion (task done). submission_body is the full content: plan text, diff, or completion description. For iterative plan refinement, pass previous_review_id and plan_phase (ticket → research_packet → design_options → narrowed_decision → implementation_plan → code_backed_plan). The plan-quality scorer evaluates structured fields, not just submission_body — populate research_summary, options_considered, selected_option, rejected_options, implementation_steps, validation_plan, code_snippets, alignment_context, consulted_roles, codebase_findings, prior_art_summary, agent_spec_id, task_spec_id, agent_role, task_scope, out_of_scope, business_rules, domain_terms, allowed_actions, prohibited_actions, robustness_requirements, linked_policy_packs, linked_benchmark_suites, promotion_gates, allowed_semantic_changes, forbidden_semantic_changes, invariant_boundaries, requires_reapproval_if, harness_quality_checks, and scope_estimate for a strong score. Returns review_id, status (pending), and a URL where the human reviewer can approve or deny. After submission, poll ck_review_status until the decision is approved or denied before proceeding. Use ck_review_feedback (human-facing) to record a decision on an existing review.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleNoHuman-readable title for display and search.
task_idNoTask identifier within the session for scoped operations.
metadataNoArbitrary key-value metadata for extensibility and audit context.
agent_roleNoReviewed role label such as support agent, code reviewer, deployment agent, or sales assistant.
plan_phaseNoCurrent phase of plan refinement.
session_idNoUnique session identifier for correlating findings, proofs, budget, and audit trail.
task_scopeNoWhat the agent or task is expected to accomplish under this plan.
annotationsNoStructured key-value annotations for machine-readable metadata.
review_typeNoType of review being submitted or queried (plan, diff, or completion).
domain_termsNo
out_of_scopeNo
project_rootNoAbsolute path to the project root this submission belongs to. Pass it when one MCP server serves several repos (e.g. an IDE-wide CONTROLKEEL_PROJECT_ROOT) so the review pins to the intended project instead of inheriting the server's working directory.
submitted_byNoIdentity of the submitter for audit trail.
task_spec_idNoStable identifier for the task-level behavior contract this plan is implementing.
agent_spec_idNoStable identifier for the agent role or task contract this plan is implementing.
code_snippetsNo
business_rulesNo
feedback_notesNoFreeform feedback notes from the reviewer.
scope_estimateNo
allowed_actionsNo
consulted_rolesNo
promotion_gatesNo
selected_optionNoThe chosen approach with rationale.
submission_bodyYesFull submission content: plan text, diff, or completion description.
validation_planNo
rejected_optionsNo
research_summaryNoSummary of research performed before this submission.
alignment_contextNo
codebase_findingsNo
prior_art_summaryNoSummary of prior attempts or related work.
options_consideredNo
previous_review_idNoReference to a prior review for iterative refinement.
prohibited_actionsNo
linked_policy_packsNo
implementation_stepsNo
invariant_boundariesNoSystem invariants and boundaries that must remain true during execution.
harness_quality_checksNoAgent-harness quality checks such as context hygiene, proof completeness, rollback safety, and compaction fidelity.
requires_reapproval_ifNoConditions that require human re-approval before continuing.
linked_benchmark_suitesNo
robustness_requirementsNo
allowed_semantic_changesNoSemantic behavior changes explicitly approved for this plan.
persona_or_actor_contextNoUser role, customer tier, permission state, or operating context relevant to behavior.
forbidden_semantic_changesNoSemantic behavior changes the agent must not introduce without a new review.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleNo
statusNo
review_idNo
review_urlNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.4.13
    • addedInput schema / properties / project_root
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Absolute path to the project root this submission belongs to. Pass it when one MCP server serves several repos (e.g. an IDE-wide CONTROLKEEL_PROJECT_ROOT) so the review pins to the intended project instead of inheriting the server's working directory.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  2. Addedv0.3.81
  3. Removedv0.3.77
  4. Changed1 schema field changedv0.3.67
    • changedOutput schema / properties / review_url / type
      Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
      +  "string",
      +  "null"
      +]
  5. Changed19 schema fields changedv0.3.55
    • addedInput schema / properties / agent_role
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Reviewed role label such as support agent, code reviewer, deployment agent, or sales assistant.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / agent_spec_id
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Stable identifier for the agent role or task contract this plan is implementing.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / allowed_actions
      Added value: +{
      +  "items": {
      +    "type": "string"
      +  },
      +  "type": "array"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / allowed_semantic_changes
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Semantic behavior changes explicitly approved for this plan.",
      +  "items": {
      +    "type": "string"
      +  },
      +  "type": "array"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / business_rules
      Added value: +{
      +  "items": {
      +    "type": "string"
      +  },
      +  "type": "array"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / domain_terms
      Added value: +{
      +  "items": {
      +    "type": "string"
      +  },
      +  "type": "array"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / forbidden_semantic_changes
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Semantic behavior changes the agent must not introduce without a new review.",
      +  "items": {
      +    "type": "string"
      +  },
      +  "type": "array"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / harness_quality_checks
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Agent-harness quality checks such as context hygiene, proof completeness, rollback safety, and compaction fidelity.",
      +  "items": {
      +    "type": "string"
      +  },
      +  "type": "array"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / invariant_boundaries
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "System invariants and boundaries that must remain true during execution.",
      +  "items": {
      +    "type": "string"
      +  },
      +  "type": "array"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / linked_benchmark_suites
      Added value: +{
      +  "items": {
      +    "type": "string"
      +  },
      +  "type": "array"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / linked_policy_packs
      Added value: +{
      +  "items": {
      +    "type": "string"
      +  },
      +  "type": "array"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / out_of_scope
      Added value: +{
      +  "items": {
      +    "type": "string"
      +  },
      +  "type": "array"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / persona_or_actor_context
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "User role, customer tier, permission state, or operating context relevant to behavior.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / prohibited_actions
      Added value: +{
      +  "items": {
      +    "type": "string"
      +  },
      +  "type": "array"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / promotion_gates
      Added value: +{
      +  "items": {
      +    "type": "string"
      +  },
      +  "type": "array"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / requires_reapproval_if
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Conditions that require human re-approval before continuing.",
      +  "items": {
      +    "type": "string"
      +  },
      +  "type": "array"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / robustness_requirements
      Added value: +{
      +  "items": {
      +    "type": "string"
      +  },
      +  "type": "array"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / task_scope
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "What the agent or task is expected to accomplish under this plan.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / task_spec_id
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Stable identifier for the task-level behavior contract this plan is implementing.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  6. Changed1 schema field changedv0.3.38
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "properties": {
      +    "review_id": {
      +      "type": "integer"
      +    },
      +    "review_url": {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "status": {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "title": {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  7. Addedv0.3.27
  8. Removedv0.3.25
  9. Changed15 schema fields changedv0.3.17
    • addedInput schema / properties / annotations / description
      Added value: +"Structured key-value annotations for machine-readable metadata."
    • addedInput schema / properties / feedback_notes / description
      Added value: +"Freeform feedback notes from the reviewer."
    • addedInput schema / properties / metadata / description
      Added value: +"Arbitrary key-value metadata for extensibility and audit context."
    • addedInput schema / properties / plan_phase / description
      Added value: +"Current phase of plan refinement."
    • addedInput schema / properties / previous_review_id / description
      Added value: +"Reference to a prior review for iterative refinement."
    • addedInput schema / properties / prior_art_summary / description
      Added value: +"Summary of prior attempts or related work."
    • addedInput schema / properties / research_summary / description
      Added value: +"Summary of research performed before this submission."
    • addedInput schema / properties / review_type / description
      Added value: +"Type of review being submitted or queried (plan, diff, or completion)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / scope_estimate / properties / files_touched_estimate / description
      Added value: +"Estimated scope of the change."
    • addedInput schema / properties / selected_option / description
      Added value: +"The chosen approach with rationale."
    • addedInput schema / properties / session_id / description
      Added value: +"Unique session identifier for correlating findings, proofs, budget, and audit trail."
    • addedInput schema / properties / submission_body / description
      Added value: +"Full submission content: plan text, diff, or completion description."
    • addedInput schema / properties / submitted_by / description
      Added value: +"Identity of the submitter for audit trail."
    • addedInput schema / properties / task_id / description
      Added value: +"Task identifier within the session for scoped operations."
    • addedInput schema / properties / title / description
      Added value: +"Human-readable title for display and search."
  10. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only give the safety triad (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false); the description adds the write semantics, that a review record is created, the returned review_id/status/URL, and the blocking workflow requirement to poll for a decision. It does not note expiry, retry, or rate-limit behavior, but it goes well past what the annotations supply.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The opening sentences are front-loaded and efficient, but the definition then degrades into a 35-item comma-separated name dump with no grouping or explanation. That wall of identifiers consumes most of the text without adding meaning an agent can act on, which is bloat rather than conciseness.

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 43-parameter submission tool with an output schema present, the description covers purpose, the write behavior, the return contract, and the post-submission workflow. The main gap is that most of the parameters the scorer consumes are named but unexplained, so an agent knows to populate them but not how.

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 58%, and the description genuinely adds meaning for review_type, submission_body, plan_phase, and previous_review_id. However, the long enumeration of ~35 field names (research_summary, options_considered, linked_policy_packs, etc.) gives no semantics for any of them — it restates names already present in the schema rather than explaining format or obligation, leaving the uncovered 42% half-served.

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?

States a specific verb and resource — submit a governed plan/diff/completion packet for human review and execution gating — and immediately distinguishes itself from ck_review_status (polling) and ck_review_feedback (recording a decision). An agent can tell this is the submission entry point without opening the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly maps review_type values to lifecycle moments (plan before implementation, diff before merging, completion when done) and describes the iterative path via previous_review_id + plan_phase. It also names the next action (poll ck_review_status until approved/denied) and the sibling to use instead for decisions (ck_review_feedback).

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