mister-parc-mcp

Journal des transitions

parc_journal

Read-onlyIdempotent

List recent fleet status transitions, newest first, including CI pass/fail changes, new upstream releases, and alert level shifts.

Instructions

Les dernières transitions vues par le relevé, la plus récente d'abord : CI passée au rouge ou au vert, nouvelle version en amont, alertes qui montent ou descendent.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "parc_journal"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`n`	No	Nombre de transitions.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`journal`	Yes	Les transitions, la plus récente d'abord.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Oct 31, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, and the description adds genuine context: result ordering (most recent first) and the categories of events returned. It says nothing about volume, the effect of the n cap, or how far back the journal reaches, so behavioral disclosure remains partial.

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?

One sentence, zero waste, with the ordering constraint and event taxonomy both front-loaded before any elaboration. Nothing to trim and nothing buried.

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?

Low-complexity read tool with one optional parameter, full schema coverage, an output schema (so return shape needn't be explained) and annotations covering the safety profile. The description supplies content scope and ordering; only the time window of the journal is unstated, a minor gap.

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% — the single parameter n is documented with default 20, min 1 and max 60 — so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description never mentions n or what happens at the 60 cap, so it adds no meaning beyond the schema; baseline 3.

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 resource (les dernières transitions) with an explicit ordering ('la plus récente d'abord') and enumerates the transition types (CI rouge/vert, nouvelle version, alertes). This lets an agent distinguish it from siblings like parc_alertes or parc_tendances, though it doesn't name an alternative directly.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied — 'les dernières transitions vues par le relevé' suggests checking recent activity — but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not, or pointer to a sibling for a different view. An agent must infer that this is the activity-feed entry point.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.