Skip to main content
Glama
mikeysrecipes

interactive-mcp

message_complete_notification

Signal completion of responses in interactive MCP server sessions by sending cross-platform notifications when tasks or queries are finished.

Instructions

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectNameYesNotification title
messageYesNotification body

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function that executes the tool logic: extracts projectName and message from arguments, sends an OS notification using node-notifier, and returns a confirmation response.
    (args) => {
      // Use inferred args type
      const { projectName, message } = args;
      notifier.notify({ title: projectName, message });
      return { content: [{ type: 'text', text: 'Notification sent.' }] };
    },
  • src/index.ts:155-169 (registration)
    Registration of the message_complete_notification tool using server.tool(), including dynamic description handling, schema reference, and inline handler function.
      server.tool(
        'message_complete_notification',
        // Description is a string here, but handle consistently
        typeof messageCompleteNotificationTool.description === 'function'
          ? messageCompleteNotificationTool.description(globalTimeoutSeconds) // Should not happen based on definition, but safe
          : messageCompleteNotificationTool.description,
        messageCompleteNotificationTool.schema, // Use schema property
        (args) => {
          // Use inferred args type
          const { projectName, message } = args;
          notifier.notify({ title: projectName, message });
          return { content: [{ type: 'text', text: 'Notification sent.' }] };
        },
      );
    }
  • Zod schema (raw shape) defining input parameters: projectName and message, used for input validation.
    const rawSchema: ZodRawShape = {
      projectName: z.string().describe('Notification title'),
      message: z.string().describe('Notification body'),
    };
  • ToolCapabilityInfo including JSON schema for parameters (input schema advertised to MCP client).
    const capabilityInfo: ToolCapabilityInfo = {
      description: 'Notify when a response has completed via OS notification.',
      parameters: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          projectName: {
            type: 'string',
            description:
              'Identifies the context/project making the notification (appears in notification title)',
          },
          message: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'The specific notification text (appears in the body)',
          },
        },
        required: ['projectName', 'message'],
      },
    };
  • Export of the ToolDefinition object aggregating capability, description, and schema, imported and used for registration in index.ts.
    export const messageCompleteNotificationTool: ToolDefinition = {
      capability: capabilityInfo,
      description: registrationDescription,
      schema: rawSchema, // Use the raw shape here
    };
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively describes key behavioral traits: the tool triggers cross-platform OS notifications, is mandatory for completion signaling, and must be called exactly once per response. It also hints at best practices like keeping messages concise. However, it doesn't mention potential side effects like notification persistence or user interaction requirements.

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?

The description is well-structured with clear sections (description, importantNotes, whenToUseThisTool, etc.), but it is verbose for a simple notification tool. Some sections (like features and bestPractices) could be condensed or integrated. While all content is relevant, it could be more front-loaded and concise without losing clarity.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's low complexity (2 simple parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is highly complete. It covers purpose, mandatory usage, parameters with semantic context, examples, and behavioral notes. For a notification tool, this provides all necessary context for an agent to invoke it correctly without needing additional structured data.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context beyond the schema: it explains that projectName 'identifies the context/project making the notification' and 'appears in notification title,' while message is 'the specific notification text' and 'appears in the body.' This clarifies the semantic role and UI placement of each parameter, elevating the score above baseline.

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?

The description explicitly states the tool's purpose: 'Notify when a response has completed' and 'signal completion to the user.' It clearly distinguishes this as a notification/signaling tool, unlike its siblings which are chat/input tools (ask_intensive_chat, request_user_input, etc.). The verb 'notify' and resource 'completion' are specific and unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides explicit, detailed guidance on when to use this tool: 'once at the end of each and every message,' 'when you've completed answering a user's query,' 'when you've finished executing a task,' etc. It also specifies exclusions: 'Do not forget this step' and 'ONLY use this tool exactly once per message.' This leaves no ambiguity about usage context or alternatives.

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/mikeysrecipes/interactive-mcp'

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