Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@loggydev/mcp-server

@loggydev/mcp-server

by loggy-dev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

create_feature_flag

Create a new feature flag to control feature rollout. Specify key, name, optional description, and enable with rollout percentage.

Instructions

Create a new feature flag

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": {
      "key": "<key>",
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "create_feature_flag"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keyYesUnique key for the flag (e.g., 'new-dashboard')
nameYesDisplay name for the flag
enabledNoWhether the flag is enabled (default: false)
percentageNoRollout percentage (0-100, default: 100 when enabled)
descriptionNoOptional description

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided; description does not disclose side effects, idempotency, or error conditions. 'Create' implies mutation only.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Extremely concise (one sentence) but lacks structure; no front-loading of critical information.

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?

No output schema, no mention of return values, errors, or uniqueness constraints; inadequate given complexity and multiple siblings.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% with parameter descriptions; description adds no extra meaning beyond 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?

Description clearly states it creates a new feature flag, but does not differentiate from siblings like toggle_feature_flag or list_feature_flags.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives; lacks context for selection.

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