Skip to main content
Glama
jfrog

JFrog MCP Server

Official
by jfrog

jfrog_get_package_curation_status

Check the curation status of a specific package version (approved, blocked, or inconclusive) by specifying package type, name, and version on the JFrog MCP Server.

Instructions

Useful for checking the curation status of a specific package version. Returns one of the following statuses: approved, blocked, inconclusive.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
packageNameYesThe name of the package, as it appears in the package repository.
packageTypeYesThe type of package.
packageVersionYesThe version of the package, as it appears in the package repository.

Implementation Reference

  • The core handler function that performs the HTTP request to JFrog Xray API to retrieve curation status for a specific package version across all repositories and computes the overall status (approved, blocked, or inconclusive).
    export async function getCurationPackageStatus(options: GetCurationPackageStatusInput): Promise<GetCurationPackageStatusOutput> {
      const response = await jfrogRequest(
        "xray/api/v1/curation/package_status/all_repos",
        {
          method: "POST",
          body: JSON.stringify({
            packageType: options.packageType,
            packageName: options.packageName,
            packageVersion: options.packageVersion
          })
        }
      ) as CurationStatusResponse & { repositories: any[] };
    
      const totalApproved = response.summary.total_approved;
      const totalBlocked = response.summary.total_blocked;
    
      const isRepoInformation = true;
    
      const status = totalApproved > 0 && totalBlocked === 0 ? "approved" : totalApproved === 0 && totalBlocked > 0 ? "blocked" : "inconclusive";
      const details = totalApproved > 0 && totalBlocked === 0 ? "The package is approved in all repositories." : totalApproved === 0 && totalBlocked > 0 ? "The package is blocked in all repositories." : "The package has mixed curation status across repositories.";
    
      if (isRepoInformation) {
        return {
          status,
          details,
          repositories: response.repositories
        };
      }
    
      return { status, details };
    }
  • Defines the MCP tool object for 'jfrog_get_package_curation_status' including name, description, input schema conversion, and a wrapper handler that parses input and calls the core function. Exports as CurationTools array.
    const getCurationPackageStatusTool = {
      name: "jfrog_get_package_curation_status",
      description: "Useful for checking the curation status of a specific package version. Returns one of the following statuses: approved, blocked, inconclusive.",
      inputSchema: zodToJsonSchema(GetCurationPackageStatusInputSchema),
      //outputSchema: zodToJsonSchema(GetCurationPackageStatusOutputSchema),
      handler: async (args: any) => {
        const parsedArgs = GetCurationPackageStatusInputSchema.parse(args);
        return await getCurationPackageStatus(parsedArgs);
      }
    };
    
    export const CurationTools = [
      getCurationPackageStatusTool
    ]; 
  • tools/index.ts:9-23 (registration)
    Imports the CurationTools and spreads them into the global 'tools' array, registering the tool for use in the MCP system.
    import { CurationTools } from "./curation.js";
    import { PermissionsTools } from "./permissions.js";
    import { ArtifactSecurityTools } from "./security.js";
    
    export const tools =[
      ...RepositoryTools,
      ...BuildsTools,
      ...RuntimeTools,
      ...AccessTools,
      ...AQLTools,
      ...CatalogTools,
      ...CurationTools,
      ...PermissionsTools,
      ...ArtifactSecurityTools,
    ];
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return values (approved, blocked, inconclusive), which is useful behavioral context, but does not mention other traits like authentication needs, rate limits, or error handling, leaving gaps for a read operation.

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?

The description is appropriately sized and front-loaded, consisting of two concise sentences: one stating the purpose and another detailing the return values, with no wasted words or redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (a read operation with three required parameters), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is fairly complete: it explains the purpose and return values. However, it could improve by adding more behavioral context like authentication or error handling to fully compensate for the lack of structured data.

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 the schema already documents all three parameters thoroughly. The description does not add any meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining parameter relationships or constraints, meeting the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('checking') and resource ('curation status of a specific package version'), distinguishing it from siblings like jfrog_get_package_info or jfrog_get_package_version_vulnerabilities by focusing on curation status rather than general info or vulnerabilities.

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 usage when checking curation status, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like jfrog_get_package_info or jfrog_get_package_version_vulnerabilities, nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites for use.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Related Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/jfrog/mcp-jfrog'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server