Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
HacknPlan MCP

HacknPlan MCP

by jompereira
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

close_milestone

Archive a milestone in a game project to mark it as complete without removing it. Restore later using the reopen tool.

Instructions

Archive (close) a milestone without deleting it. Use reopen_milestone to restore it.

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": {
      "projectId": "<projectId>",
      "milestoneId": "<milestoneId>"
    },
    "name": "close_milestone"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectIdYes
milestoneIdYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided. Description states no deletion occurs, implying reversibility. However, lacks details on side effects (e.g., impact on work items, notifications, permissions) which would be valuable for a closure action.

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, no redundancy. Action and key alternative are front-loaded. Every word is purposeful.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple tool with 2 required params and no output schema, description covers purpose and alternatives but fails to explain parameters. Lacks completeness in guiding correct invocation.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema has 0% description coverage and description does not mention parameters at all. Agent is left to infer that projectId and milestoneId are required IDs with no guidance on format or retrieval.

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?

Description clearly states action (archive/close) and resource (milestone), and explicitly distinguishes from delete and reopen operations. It references sibling reopen_milestone for restoration, providing clear differentiation.

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?

Describes when to use (to archive without deleting) and mentions alternative (reopen_milestone). Does not explicitly state when not to use, but context is sufficient for agent to choose among siblings like delete_milestone.

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