Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
crm-lifecycle-ops

crm-lifecycle-ops

by har5h98
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Save a QA sign-off report

save_sign_off_report

Re-runs a campaign check and saves the result as a Markdown QA sign-off report for launch tickets, including verdict, per-message findings, unverified items, and reviewer sign-off.

Instructions

Re-run the campaign check and save the result as a Markdown QA sign-off report (verdict, findings per message, what wasn't verified, reviewer sign-off) under ~/.crm-lifecycle-ops/reports/. Returns the path and the Markdown. Use after check_campaign when someone wants a record for a launch ticket.

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": {
      "platform": "<platform>",
      "name_or_id": "<name_or_id>"
    },
    "name": "save_sign_off_report"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
platformYesWhich platform.
workspaceNoWorkspace label. Defaults to the connected one, or "demo" when nothing is connected.
name_or_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.5.4

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only say it is a non-destructive write; the description adds the important behavioral detail that it re-runs the campaign check (a side effect beyond mere saving), writes to a specific filesystem location, and returns both the path and the Markdown. It does not say whether an existing report is overwritten or how the file is named, which is the main remaining gap.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and artifact, then the usage trigger. No filler and no repetition of the title.

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 three-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the return value (path plus Markdown) and the report contents, which is what an agent needs. Only the overwrite/naming behavior and the undocumented name_or_id parameter are left unaddressed.

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 coverage is 67% and the description adds no parameter-level meaning at all; notably name_or_id is undocumented in both places. With the schema already describing platform and workspace, the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('save the result as a Markdown QA sign-off report'), names the exact artifact contents (verdict, findings per message, unverified items, sign-off) and the destination path, and distinguishes itself from check_campaign by adding persistence.

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?

'Use after check_campaign when someone wants a record for a launch ticket' gives a clear trigger and ordering relative to a named sibling. It stops short of stating when not to use it (e.g. for ad-hoc inspection without a ticket), so it is not a full 5.

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