mister-parc-mcp

Workflow réutilisable du socle

socle_workflow

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a reusable workflow's uses: line, default inputs, tools it runs, and calling repositories with their inputs to reuse or configure it correctly.

Instructions

Un workflow réutilisable du socle : la ligne uses: à écrire (étiquette majeure roulante), ses entrées par défaut quand le relevé les connaît, les outils qu'il lance, et les dépôts qui l'appellent, avec les entrées qu'ils lui passent.

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": {
      "nom": "<nom>"
    },
    "name": "socle_workflow"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`nom`	Yes	Fichier du workflow réutilisable : pwa-ci.yml…

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`nom`	Yes
`uses`	Yes	La ligne à écrire dans un workflow appelant.
`outils`	Yes
`defauts`	Yes	Entrées et leur valeur par défaut.
`version`	Yes
`appele_par`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Oct 31, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare `readOnlyHint`, `idempotentHint`, and `openWorldHint`, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a useful behavioral caveat that default inputs are included only when known, but it does not explain missing-workflow behavior, auth needs, or open-world implications.

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?

The description is a single front-loaded sentence with a colon-separated list of what the tool provides. It contains no filler, and each clause maps directly to useful output data or behavior.

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 simple read-only lookup with 100% schema coverage and an output schema, the description is sufficient: it says what the tool surfaces and notes the conditional availability of default inputs. The main gap is usage guidance across sibling tools, which is captured separately.

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?

The single `nom` parameter is fully documented in the schema as the reusable workflow file, with `pwa-ci.yml…` as an example. The description adds no additional syntax, naming, or format guidance beyond the schema, so the high-coverage baseline of 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?

The description identifies the resource as a reusable workflow and enumerates the returned facets: the `uses:` line, default inputs, launched tools, and calling repositories. This is more than a tautology, but it never states an explicit retrieval verb or distinguishes the tool from siblings such as `socle_module` or `socle_usage`.

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, when-not-to-use, prerequisite, or alternative-tool guidance. The many `socle_*` siblings mean an agent could benefit from routing guidance, but the description offers only an implicit resource scope.

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