Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
joinwell52-AI

fcop-mcp

by joinwell52-AI
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

submit_task

Submits a task’s current-attempt report for Core T3 review, linking the task ID, actor, and report reference.

Instructions

Request Core T3 active to review with the explicit current-attempt REPORT.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actorYes
task_idYes
report_refYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed6 schema fields changedv4.0.5
    • removedInput schema / properties / actor / default
      Removed value: -"agent"
    • removedInput schema / properties / actor / description
      Removed value: -"Role code of the agent submitting the task."
    • addedInput schema / properties / report_ref
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / task_id / description
      Removed value: -"Task ID or full filename."
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "task_id"
-]New value: +[
+  "task_id",
+  "actor",
+  "report_ref"
+]
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "result": {
-      "type": "string"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "result"
-  ],
-  "type": "object",
-  "x-fastmcp-wrap-result": true
-}New value: +null
  2. First observedv3.2.4

TDQS

D1.7/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden and fails. It does not say whether this mutates task state, what 'Core T3 active' review means, what happens if the report is stale or missing, whether the call is idempotent, or what permissions the actor needs.

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?

One short sentence, but the brevity comes from under-specification rather than efficiency; the most important information is compressed into opaque terms like 'Core T3 active' and 'explicit current-attempt'.

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?

For a three-required-parameter state-changing tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description supplies essentially none of the operational context an agent needs. Nothing explains the review lifecycle, preconditions, or outcome.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% for three required parameters, so the description must compensate and does not. 'REPORT' loosely maps to report_ref, but task_id and actor are never explained, nor is the expected format of any identifier.

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

Purpose2/5

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

The phrase 'Request Core T3 active to review' gestures at submitting something for review, but 'Core T3 active' is unexplained internal jargon that an agent cannot decode. The object 'the explicit current-attempt REPORT' hints the resource is a report, yet the tool name (submit_task) and the description don't converge on a plain verb+resource statement.

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 indication of when to use this versus write_report, approve_task, or the other task-lifecycle siblings. The word 'explicit' and 'current-attempt' imply preconditions (a report must already exist and be current) but never state them as rules.

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