Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Archiware MCP

Archiware MCP

by mnott
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

set_cleaning

Sets a drive's cleaning flag to 0 or 1 so P5 avoids flagged drives when choosing write targets; requires confirm:true.

Instructions

Sets a drive's cleaning flag (0 or 1). P5 avoids drives flagged 1 when choosing where to write. Requires confirm:true.

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": {
      "device": "<device>",
      "value": "<value>"
    },
    "name": "set_cleaning"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
valueYes0 off, 1 on
deviceYesDevice name, e.g. sg6
confirmNoMust be true to actually run

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.1

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden; it does disclose the key behavioral effect (P5 skips flagged drives) and the confirm gate that prevents accidental execution. It omits whether the operation is idempotent, what happens for an unknown device, and whether the same confirm requirement applies when clearing the flag.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and its effect, then the safety requirement. Nothing extraneous.

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 three-parameter toggle with full schema coverage and no output schema, the definition covers the action, its consequence, and the confirm gate. Only minor items, such as error behavior or the difference from clean_drive, are missing.

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%, so device, value, and confirm are already documented, and the description's "(0 or 1)" and confirm mention mostly restate the schema. It does add meaning by explaining what value=1 causes downstream, but gives no examples beyond what the schema's enum already supplies.

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 verb and resource ("Sets a drive's cleaning flag") plus the accepted values, and adds the operational consequence that P5 avoids flagged drives when choosing write targets. It does not distinguish itself from the sibling clean_drive, which an agent could easily confuse with this flag-setting operation.

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?

Gives a clear prerequisite (confirm:true) and implies when the flag matters via the P5 placement behavior, but offers no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no contrast with related tools such as clean_drive.

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