Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ya-tracker-mcp

ya-tracker-mcp

by imdeniil
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

create_resolution

Create a resolution entry with a unique key and localized name to categorize issue outcomes.

Instructions

Create a resolution.

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": {
      "key": "<key>",
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "create_resolution"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keyYesResolution key
nameYesLocalized name

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.8.2

TDQS

C2.4/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely restates the creation action and gives no information about permissions, uniqueness, duplicate handling, return values, or side effects, making it effectively a tautology of the tool name.

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 description is a single short sentence, which is concise, but it under-specifies and largely repeats the tool name. It lacks any supporting structure or detail, so it does not earn its place as a standalone description.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Even though an output schema exists and parameter descriptions are complete, the description omits essential context: what a resolution represents, whether keys must be unique, required permissions, and its relationship to list_resolutions. This is insufficient for correct invocation of a create operation.

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?

The input schema provides 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters ('Resolution key' and 'Localized name'), so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no further parameter meaning, such as the structure of the localized name object or key constraints.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description 'Create a resolution' clearly identifies the action (create) and resource (resolution), distinguishing it from sibling create_* tools. However, it provides no qualifiers or context about what a resolution is, so it is clear but minimally specified.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_resolutions or create_issue_type. No prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative tool references are provided.

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