Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
joinwell52-AI

fcop-mcp

by joinwell52-AI
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

write_issue

Record a Core issue with explicit workspace and subject identity to track problems and coordinate agents, including sender, recipient, severity, body, and references.

Instructions

Append a Core ISSUE with explicit workspace and subject identity.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyYes
senderYes
severityYes
recipientYes
referencesNo
subject_refYes
workspace_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed12 schema fields changedv4.0.5
    • removedInput schema / properties / body / description
      Removed value: -"Detailed issue body in Markdown."
    • addedInput schema / properties / recipient
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / references
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / reporter
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Reporter role code (uppercase).",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / sender
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / severity / default
      Removed value: -"medium"
    • removedInput schema / properties / severity / description
      Removed value: -"``critical`` / ``high`` / ``medium`` / ``low``.\nAliases: ``P0`` → critical, ``P1`` → high, ``P2`` →\nmedium, ``P3`` → low."
    • addedInput schema / properties / subject_ref
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / summary
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "One-line summary written into the filename and\nfrontmatter.",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / workspace_id
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "reporter",
-  "summary",
-  "body"
-]New value: +[
+  "workspace_id",
+  "sender",
+  "recipient",
+  "subject_ref",
+  "body",
+  "severity"
+]
    • 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

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only says 'append' and mentions workspace/subject identity. It omits permissions, idempotency or duplicate behavior, severity semantics, and side effects for a six-required-parameter write tool.

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?

The description is a single front-loaded sentence with no filler. Brevity is structurally appropriate, though it leaves other dimensions underdeveloped.

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?

Given seven parameters, six required, no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema descriptions, the definition is far from complete. It does not explain valid formats, required identity relationships, severity values, or expected results.

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%, so the description should explain all seven parameters. It adds only vague meaning for workspace_id and subject_ref, leaving sender, recipient, body, severity, and references undocumented in both schema and description.

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 verb 'Append' plus the resource 'Core ISSUE' makes the action identifiable and distinguishes it from list_issues and read_review siblings. 'Core ISSUE' is domain jargon that is not explained, so it is clear but not fully self-contained.

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 list_issues or other write tools, and no prerequisites or exclusions are stated. The sentence only implies that this is a write operation.

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