Skip to main content
Glama
gbatistuta0

AppFactory

by gbatistuta0
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Orchestrator Preflight

orchestrator_preflight
Read-onlyIdempotent

Validate pre-flight readiness before an autonomous run: confirm run options, config keys, fastlane session, and caffeinate command; return blockers or setup_required if AppFactory is not configured.

Instructions

Pre-flight for an autonomous run: run options confirmed, config keys present, fastlane session fresh, caffeinate command.

Use when: before starting the orchestrator_next_action loop. Ready when blockers is empty. Returns setup_required first if AppFactory is not set up. Returns: {ok, blockers: [...], caffeinate, ...}.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
app_dirNoApp directory; omit before the app is scaffolded.
skip_options_checkNoIf true, do not require run_options_save to have been called first. Default false.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.1.5
    • addedInput schema / properties / app_dir / description
      Added value: +"App directory; omit before the app is scaffolded."
    • addedInput schema / properties / skip_options_check / description
      Added value: +"If true, do not require run_options_save to have been called first. Default false."
  2. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, so the safety bar is lower. The description adds real context: it explains the checks performed, the blockers contract, and the setup_required behavior when AppFactory isn't configured, though it doesn't detail rate limits or failure modes beyond that.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loaded with the core purpose, then usage, readiness, and return shape in tight order. It is dense and fragmentary in places (e.g. 'caffeinate command') but every clause earns its place.

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?

An output schema exists, so explaining return values isn't strictly required, yet it sketches the return shape and the setup_required path. Combined with annotations, an agent has enough to call and interpret it, with only minor gaps around blocker semantics.

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 both parameters are already documented in the schema, making 3 the baseline. The description alludes to 'run options confirmed' which loosely maps to skip_options_check, but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb+resource (pre-flight checks before an autonomous run) and enumerates what is validated: run options, config keys, fastlane session, caffeinate. It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling orchestrator_next_action loop it gates.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use when: before starting the orchestrator_next_action loop,' names the alternative and the precondition, and adds the ready condition ('Ready when blockers is empty') plus the setup_required fallback path. Nothing is left to inference.

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