Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Gantry

Gantry

by fourn9
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

open

Read-only

Initiates a versioned change request in a specified zone, capturing its basis and intent with an optional review deadline.

Instructions

open

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": {
      "arguments": "<arguments>"
    },
    "name": "open"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
argumentsYes
idempotency_keyNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv3.4.0

TDQS

D1.1/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

The annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds nothing to explain what "open" does behaviorally. The presence of an unexplained idempotency_key parameter is a hint the agent cannot interpret without prose, leaving the read-only claim as the only signal.

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 single word is technically concise but is under-specification rather than economy. There is no structure and nothing front-loaded because there is nothing said.

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?

A tool requiring a nested arguments wrapper with four undocumented sub-properties and an idempotency key needs substantial explanation, and none is present. With no output schema and no annotations beyond read-only safety, the definition is wholly inadequate for correct invocation.

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 supplies no parameter meaning at all. The nested arguments object contains undocumented fields (zone, basis, intent, due_before) plus an idempotency_key, none of which an agent can interpret from the current text.

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

Purpose1/5

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

Tautological: description restates name/title.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

There is no when-to-use guidance, no preconditions, and no mention of alternatives. An agent has no basis for choosing this over the many sibling retrieval tools.

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