Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Astronomer MCP Server

Astronomer MCP Server

by leouofa
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

get_job_status

Retrieve the status, progress, and result of an ActiveJob or Sidekiq background task using its job ID.

Instructions

Check the status, progress, and result of an ActiveJob/Sidekiq background task.

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": {
      "job_id": "<job_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_job_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
job_idYesActiveJob UUID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the return contents (status, progress, and result), which is the most valuable behavioral fact for a status tool, but says nothing about behavior for unknown or expired job IDs, whether the call blocks, or job retention.

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?

A single tight sentence, front-loaded with the verb and enumerating exactly what is returned. No filler or redundant phrasing to trim.

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?

For a one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers the essentials: it names the job system and the return fields. The remaining gap is routing guidance against wait_for_job/list_jobs, which matters given the sibling set.

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?

Only one parameter, job_id, and schema description coverage is 100% ('ActiveJob UUID'), so the schema already defines it fully. The description adds no format or sourcing detail (e.g. where the UUID comes from) beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: check status/progress/result of an ActiveJob/Sidekiq background task. The scope (background job vs platform status) is reasonably clear, but the description never distinguishes this from the sibling wait_for_job, which an agent could easily confuse for the same purpose.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of when not to use it, and no pointer to alternatives such as wait_for_job or list_jobs. The only hint is the imperative 'Check', so the agent must infer that this is a non-blocking poll rather than a blocking wait.

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