Skip to main content
Glama

Quant Swarm Audit — Poll Job Status

audit.status
Read-onlyIdempotent

Poll an audit job by job_id to get completion status, overall diagnostic assessment, finding counts by category, and the input SHA-256 hash at 0 credits in read-only mode.

Instructions

Polls an audit job by job_id in read-only mode at 0 credits. Returns completion status, overall diagnostic assessment, finding counts by category, and input SHA-256 hash.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
job_idYesAudit job_id returned by `audit.run`.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
howNo
modeNo
toolNo
errorNo
accessNo
job_idNo
reasonNo
statusNo
metricsNo
eligibleNo
findingsNo
gbp_costNo
job_id_aNo
job_id_bNo
next_stepNo
strategy_aNo
strategy_bNo
html_reportNo
max_creditsNo
credits_costNo
generated_atNo
input_sha256No
metrics_diffNo
new_warningsNo
preflight_idNo
random_seedsNo
has_benchmarkNo
strategy_nameNo
written_filesNo
approval_tokenNo
execution_planNo
input_sha256_aNo
input_sha256_bNo
trades_summaryNo
artifact_hashesNo
coverage_matrixNo
credits_chargedNo
idempotency_keyNo
markdown_reportNo
package_versionNo
returns_summaryNo
assessment_afterNo
cost_assumptionsNo
headline_metricsNo
not_tested_countNo
required_creditsNo
assessment_beforeNo
idempotent_replayNo
request_access_atNo
resolved_findingsNo
validation_errorsNo
counts_by_categoryNo
overall_assessmentNo
finding_transitionsNo
remediation_verdictNo
has_features_manifestNo
not_investment_adviceNo
outbound_data_previewNo
reproducibility_bundleNo
estimated_runtime_secondsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: polling semantics and the '0 credits' cost characteristic, which annotations cannot express. It stops short of describing polling cadence or terminal-state behavior.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the operation and mode, followed by the return contents. No redundant or filler wording.

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?

An output schema exists, so enumerating return fields is a bonus rather than a requirement, and annotations plus schema fully cover safety and the single parameter. The remaining gap is sibling disambiguation against audit.report, which matters given the dense audit.* family.

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 job_id parameter is fully documented in the schema as coming from audit.run. The description repeats rather than extends that meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Polls') and resource ('an audit job by job_id'), plus the operational mode ('read-only, 0 credits'). It does not, however, distinguish itself from the closely related sibling audit.report, which an agent could plausibly confuse with status polling.

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?

The word 'Polls' and the job_id reference imply the workflow (call after audit.run until complete), but the description never states when to use this versus audit.report or audit.compare, nor does it say what to do on an incomplete job (retry interval, terminal states).

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