Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mnema

mnema

Official
by mnema-work
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Next actions: what moves a task allows

next_actions
Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists the workflow transitions a task allows from its current state, showing which moves the gate would authorize. Returns an empty list for terminal tasks and searches every project for the id.

Instructions

Show the transitions the workflow allows a task next, from its current state. Use it to answer "what can I do to this task": each suggestion is a real move the gate would authorize. A terminal task returns an empty list (no legal moves). The task is looked for in EVERY project of this workspace; an id no tree of it holds is refused, naming the projects searched. After the list, a line says who has the task and one the last thing that happened to it, when the record has either. Read-only.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "next_actions"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe task id to inspect (from `bootstrap`, or `search`).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the read-only/idempotent annotations, it discloses real behavior: the id is searched across every project in the workspace, an unknown id is refused with the projects searched named, a terminal task yields an empty list, and the response appends assignee and last-event lines when present. That is materially more than the annotations convey.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence and no sentence is filler. Minor deduction: the sentence about the trailing assignee/last-event lines is awkwardly worded ('and one the last thing that happened to it'), costing 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?

With one parameter, no output schema, and only read-only annotations, the description carries the return-value story itself, covering the move list, the empty terminal case, the refusal case, and the trailing context lines. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 coverage is already 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds genuine meaning by explaining that the single id parameter is resolved against every project tree in the workspace, telling the agent how the identifier is interpreted rather than just its type.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: it shows the transitions a workflow permits a task from its current state. That is clearly distinct from a mutation tool like task_transition, though it never names that sibling, so the agent must infer the contrast.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It gives a concrete use case ('what can I do to this task') and states the terminal-state outcome (empty list). There is no explicit when-not-to-use or named alternative, which keeps it short of a 5.

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