Skip to main content
Glama

Preview a schedule-board job move

previewJobRequestMove

Preview the outcome of moving a confirmed job to a new time or technician, showing resulting schedule, displaced jobs, and warnings before committing.

Instructions

Preview a schedule-board job move

Computes (WITHOUT writing) the outcome of moving a confirmed job to a new time and/or technician: where it lands, every later job pushed back per mode, and the warnings the coordinator would accept (displaced jobs leaving their confirmed windows, overtime). Same technician = pure time move; different technician = manual reassign. Read-only — safe to call repeatedly while dragging; commit is a separate endpoint. See SCHEDULE_BOARD_DESIGN.md. Warning detail: a TECH_NOT_FEASIBLE warning carries reason = cannot_arrive_in_time (commute from the tech day-start location / shift start; earliest_feasible_at (RFC3339 UTC) is the first same-day time they CAN be on site — suggest it as the drop slot) | missing_required_skills | not_available_today (no working hours, approved time off, or outside the service area) | not_lead_tier. For a P0 move this warning is advisory (coordinator may commit anyway); for p1/p2/p3 the same condition is the hard 409 SCHEDULE_MOVE_TECH_INFEASIBLE. 409 NEXT STEPS: SCHEDULE_MOVE_NOT_ELIGIBLE (job unconfirmed/unquoted/archived/completed — not movable) · SCHEDULE_MOVE_IN_PROGRESS (tech already executing — do not move) · SCHEDULE_MOVE_IN_PAST (pick a future time) · SCHEDULE_MOVE_SLOT_OCCUPIED (landing window blocked by an immovable anchor — another tech/time) · SCHEDULE_MOVE_TECH_INFEASIBLE (non-P0 hard block: target tech not qualified/available — see the TECH_NOT_FEASIBLE warning reasons; change tech or time) · SCHEDULE_MOVE_MULTIDAY_UNSUPPORTED (multi-day jobs not movable v1) · SCHEDULE_MOVE_NO_WORKING_DAY (pick a working day) · SCHEDULE_MOVE_REQUIRES_FREE_SLOT (non-P0 moves may not displace — free capacity only, unless the owner enables allow_non_p0_displacement) · SCHEDULE_MOVE_CREW_UNSTAFFABLE (a crew slot has no feasible replacement at the new time — another time). A landing outside the customer-confirmed window is NOT an error — it returns 200 with a MOVED_OUTSIDE_WINDOW warning (customer_window attached) that the coordinator overrides.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesJob request ID (UUID or short_code)
modeYesCascade mode for displaced jobs: overtime = stay same-day (tech works late); next_day = overflow rolls to the next working day.
start_atYesNew start — business-local naive datetime, no offset. Must be in the future.
technician_idYesTarget technician — may equal the current tech (pure time move) or differ (manual reassign).
idempotency_keyNoOptional idempotency key (forwarded as the Idempotency-Key header). Reuse the same value when retrying so the operation runs at most once.
Behavior1/5

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

The description claims the tool is 'Read-only—safe to call repeatedly while dragging', but the annotations set readOnlyHint to false. This direct contradiction violates the evaluation rule that scores 1 for such contradictions. Although the description provides extensive behavioral details (warnings, 409 codes), the contradiction undermines trust and transparency.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is front-loaded with purpose but becomes verbose with detailed error code explanations. While structured, it could be more concise. The length is appropriate for the complexity, but some details (e.g., full 409 error list) might be better placed elsewhere.

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 tool with 5 parameters, no output schema, and numerous error conditions, the description is highly complete. It covers warning details, error codes with next steps, and behavioral constraints. The only gap is the lack of explicit return value structure, but the description implies what is returned (new location, pushed jobs, warnings).

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds marginal value beyond the schema, such as clarifying that technician_id may be the current tech (pure time move) or different (manual reassign), and that idempotency_key is forwarded as header. However, this does not significantly reduce ambiguity beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

The description starts with the verb 'Preview' and clearly states the tool computes the outcome of moving a confirmed job without writing, distinguishing it from the sibling tool 'commitJobRequestMove'. It specifies the scope (time and/or technician) and mentions it is safe for dragging, making the purpose unmistakable.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description explicitly states when to use (previewing moves before committing) and when not (it is read-only, commit is separate). It also provides context for error codes and next steps, but does not explicitly list alternative tools for similar operations (e.g., previewEmergencyReschedule) or conditions under which this tool should be avoided.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/crisphive/crisphive-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server