Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Repro Capsule MCP

Repro Capsule MCP

by efficjump
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

execute_plan

Destructive

Execute a reviewed command plan using an approval token to record bounded, redacted output for bug reproduction.

Instructions

Consume one approval token and record bounded, redacted command output.

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": {
      "case_id": "<case_id>",
      "plan_id": "<plan_id>",
      "approval_token": "<approval_token>"
    },
    "name": "execute_plan"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
case_idYesIdentifier returned by start_case.
plan_idYesIdentifier returned by plan_command.
allow_networkNoExplicit approval for a network-intent plan; server opt-in is also required.
approval_tokenYesOne-time token returned with the reviewed command plan.
allow_workspace_writeNoExplicit approval for a plan marked as workspace-writing.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already flag as destructive and not read-only; description adds that the token is consumed once and output is bounded and redacted, providing useful behavioral context beyond annotations.

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?

Single sentence with front-loaded verb, no unnecessary words, efficient and clear.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Description is concise but lacks details on error handling, idempotency, or what happens on token reuse; however, output schema likely covers return structure, so it is minimally adequate.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions; the tool description does not add further parameter-level detail, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states it consumes an approval token and records bounded, redacted command output, specifying a unique action distinct from sibling tools like plan_command or start_case.

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 description implies use after plan_command (requires plan_id), but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives among siblings.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools