Skip to main content
Glama
kingdomseed

Structured Workflow MCP

by kingdomseed

present_guidance

Provides structured guidance for summarizing work during the presentation phase to ensure clear communication of completed tasks and outcomes.

Instructions

Get guidance for the PRESENT phase - summarizing work

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • Tool schema definition for 'present_guidance': name, description, and empty input schema
    {
      name: 'present_guidance',
      description: 'Get guidance for the PRESENT phase - summarizing work',
      inputSchema: { type: 'object', properties: {} }
    }
  • src/index.ts:137-157 (registration)
    Registration of all tools including phase guidance tools via createPhaseGuidanceTools()
    const tools = [
      // Workflow entry points
      createRefactorWorkflowTool(),                 // Refactoring workflow
      createFeatureWorkflowTool(),                  // Feature creation workflow
      createTestWorkflowTool(),                     // Test writing workflow
      createTddWorkflowTool(),                      // TDD workflow
      createBuildCustomWorkflowTool(),              // Custom workflow builder
      
      // Phase guidance tools
      ...createPhaseGuidanceTools(),                // Handles both suggestive and directive modes
      createTestGuidanceTool(),                     // TEST phase guidance
      
      // Validation tools
      ...createValidationTools(),                   // Both validate_action and validate_phase_completion
      
      // Workflow management
      createUserInputRequiredTool(),                // Escalation handling
      createWorkflowStatusTool(),                   // Workflow status
      createPhaseOutputTool(),                      // Phase output recording
      createDiscoverWorkflowToolsTool()             // Tool discovery
    ];
  • Handler dispatch for present_guidance and other phase guidance tools, calling handlePhaseGuidance
    case 'setup_guidance':
    case 'audit_inventory_guidance':
    case 'compare_analyze_guidance':
    case 'question_determine_guidance':
    case 'refactor_guidance':
    case 'lint_guidance':
    case 'iterate_guidance':
    case 'present_guidance':
      return {
        content: [{
          type: 'text',
          text: JSON.stringify(await handlePhaseGuidance(name, sessionManager), null, 2)
        }]
      };
  • Main handler function for all phase guidance tools including present_guidance, routes to suggestive or directive mode
    export async function handlePhaseGuidance(
      phaseName: string,
      sessionManager: SessionManager
    ): Promise<PhaseGuidance> {
      const session = sessionManager.getSession();
      const isDirectiveMode = session?.workflowConfig !== undefined;
      
      // Route to appropriate guidance based on mode
      if (isDirectiveMode) {
        return getDirectiveGuidance(phaseName, sessionManager);
      } else {
        return getSuggestiveGuidance(phaseName, sessionManager);
      }
    }
  • Specific execution logic for present_guidance in suggestive mode
    present_guidance: {
      phase: 'PRESENT',
      objective: 'Create a comprehensive summary of your refactoring work',
      instructions: [
        'Summarize what was refactored and why',
        'List all files that were modified',
        'Highlight key improvements made',
        'Document any remaining issues or future work',
        'Provide metrics on the refactoring'
      ],
      suggestedApproach: [
        'Start with a high-level summary',
        'Then provide specific details',
        'Include before/after comparisons if relevant',
        'Mention any challenges overcome',
        'Suggest next steps or future improvements'
      ],
      expectedOutput: {
        executiveSummary: 'Brief overview of the refactoring',
        detailedChanges: 'Comprehensive list of modifications',
        improvements: 'Benefits achieved by the refactoring',
        metrics: 'Quantifiable improvements (if any)',
        recommendations: 'Suggestions for future work'
      },
      nextPhase: 'Workflow complete! Use workflow_status to see final metrics'
    }
  • Specific execution logic for present_guidance in directive mode (more detailed)
    present_guidance: {
      phase: 'PRESENT',
      objective: 'Summarize refactoring work - COMPLETION PHASE',
    
      directiveInstructions: [
        '🔴 MANDATORY: You MUST create comprehensive summary',
        '📊 REQUIRED: You MUST include before/after metrics',
        '🎯 CRITICAL: You MUST document all improvements made',
        '📋 ESSENTIAL: You MUST provide future recommendations',
        '📁 BLOCKING: You MUST create final presentation report'
      ],
    
      instructions: [
        'Create comprehensive executive summary of the refactoring work',
        'Document all changes made with before/after comparisons',
        'Quantify improvements achieved (code quality, maintainability, etc.)',
        'Provide metrics on files modified, tests updated, issues resolved',
        'Include recommendations for future improvements',
        'Create final summary presentation document'
      ],
    
      requiredOutputFiles: [
        {
          path: 'structured-workflow/{task-name}/08-final-summary.md',
          description: 'Final presentation summary of all work completed',
          required: true,
          format: 'markdown',
          validationRules: [
            'Must include executive summary',
            'Must list all changes made',
            'Must include metrics and improvements',
            'Must provide lessons learned and recommendations'
          ]
        }
      ],
    
      expectedOutput: {
        executiveSummary: 'High-level overview of refactoring',
        detailedChanges: 'Comprehensive list of modifications',
        improvements: 'Benefits achieved through refactoring',
        metrics: 'Quantifiable before/after comparisons',
        recommendations: 'Suggestions for future work',
        outputFiles: '1 required final summary file created'
      },
    
      nextPhase: 'Workflow complete! Check workflow_status for final metrics'
    },
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states it 'gets guidance', without disclosing behavioral traits like whether it's read-only, requires authentication, has rate limits, or what 'guidance' includes (e.g., text, structured data). It lacks details on response format, error handling, or side effects, leaving significant gaps for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the purpose ('Get guidance for the PRESENT phase') and adds a clarifying note ('summarizing work'). It's appropriately sized with no wasted words, though it could be slightly more structured by explicitly separating purpose from usage context.

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 the complexity (a guidance tool with no output schema), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'guidance' returns (e.g., text summary, steps, examples), making it hard for an agent to use effectively. With no annotations and false output schema, more detail on behavior and output is needed for adequate context.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool has 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema fully documents inputs. The description doesn't need to add parameter details, and it correctly doesn't mention any, earning a baseline score. No compensation is required as there are no parameters to explain.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description states the tool 'Get guidance for the PRESENT phase - summarizing work', which provides a clear verb ('Get guidance') and resource ('PRESENT phase'), but it's vague about what 'guidance' entails and doesn't distinguish from siblings like 'audit_inventory_guidance' or 'iterate_guidance'. It specifies the phase context but lacks detail on output format or content.

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?

The description implies usage during the 'PRESENT phase' for 'summarizing work', but offers no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'phase_output' or 'validate_phase_completion'), prerequisites, or exclusions. It provides minimal context without naming alternatives or detailing specific scenarios.

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

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/kingdomseed/structured-workflow-mcp'

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