remus-mcp

by christianmz565

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Hybrid

trace_add

Creates a trace link between source and target objects in a REMUS Jet database project, with an optional checked flag.

Instructions

Add trace

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": {
      "project_id": "<project_id>",
      "source_oid": "<source_oid>",
      "target_oid": "<target_oid>"
    },
    "name": "trace_add"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`checked`	No
`project_id`	Yes
`source_oid`	Yes
`target_oid`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 1, 2026

TDQS

D1.5/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but 'Add trace' reveals nothing about side effects, required object relationships, idempotency, error conditions, or return values. It does not even clarify whether the operation mutates persistent state.

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 description is extremely short, but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. Every word is generic, and no useful information is front-loaded because no useful information exists.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given four parameters, three required, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is far too sparse to enable correct invocation. An agent would need to guess the meaning of source_oid and target_oid and whether checked modifies behavior.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description provides no meaning for project_id, source_oid, target_oid, or checked. An agent cannot determine what these parameters represent or how they should be populated.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Add trace' merely restates the tool name trace_add and offers no definition of what a 'trace' is in this domain. It provides a verb and object but lacks the specificity needed to distinguish the operation from related concepts like trace_matrix or get_traces.

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?

The description gives no indication of when to use this tool versus alternatives such as trace_remove or get_traces. No preconditions, context, or exclusions are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage entirely from the tool name.

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