Skip to main content
Glama
jade-mcp
by choiyounggi

재택근무 신청 상신 (한 건)

jade_commit_remote_work
Destructive

Submits a single remote work application for a specific date using a valid prepare token, after rechecking the preview and requiring explicit user approval.

Instructions

jade_prepare_remote_work 또는 jade_prepare_remote_work_day 가 날짜별로 준 토큰 하나로 그날의 재택 근무 신청서 한 장을 결재선에 상신한다. 상신 직전에 화면을 새로 열어 검사를 다시 통과하고 미리보기와 같을 때만 보낸다. 결재자에게 바로 전달되므로 사용자가 미리보기를 보고 명시적으로 승인했을 때만 호출한다.

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": {
      "token": "<token>"
    },
    "name": "jade_commit_remote_work"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tokenYesjade_prepare_remote_work·jade_prepare_remote_work_day 가 그 날짜에 돌려준 토큰

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description still adds real value by disclosing the re-validation step (screen reopened and checks re-run before sending) and that submission is delivered directly to the approver — behavior an agent could not infer from the annotations. It omits what happens on validation failure or on a duplicate call, which is the remaining gap.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the action and its token source, then the validation behavior, then the approval precondition. Every sentence carries an actionable constraint and there is no filler.

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 one-parameter, irreversible submission tool with annotations and no output schema, the description covers source, re-validation, and approval gating. It falls slightly short on failure/duplicate handling, which matters given idempotentHint=false.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and already explains that token comes from the prepare tools. The description adds the scoping meaning that one per-date token maps to exactly one application sheet for that date, which the schema does not state.

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 (상신/submit) plus the exact resource (one day's remote-work application) and names the sibling tools that produce its token, so it is clearly separable from jade_commit_remote_work_revert or jade_prepare_remote_work_day 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?

Gives an explicit precondition and an implicit exclusion: call only after the user has seen the preview and explicitly approved, since the request goes straight to the approver. It also points to the two prepare tools as the source of the token, leaving no ambiguity about the prepare/commit pairing.

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