Skip to main content
Glama
murtazox04

Cue

by murtazox04
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

explain

Read-only

Dry-run an event for a recipient to see which rules would fire, their outcomes, and why others wouldn't, before sending. Nothing is stored or sent.

Instructions

Dry-run an event for a person: which rules would fire, what each would do and why the others would not. Use it before send_event to check that a rule will reach the person; nothing is stored or sent. Needs an admin key, so agent keys get 403 and should read get_event for a real event instead.

Returns rules, one entry per rule listening for the name, with rule, matched, status (what the message would get, e.g. queued or suppressed), reason and digest_id, read like get_event's outcome. Fails with 404 when recipient does not exist yet.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNoEvent details to test conditions with, as for send_event.
recipientYesExternal id of an existing recipient; unlike send_event, an unknown id is not created.
event_nameYesEvent name to test, as for send_event, e.g. `order.shipped`.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.1.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / data / description
      Added value: +"Event details to test conditions with, as for send_event."
    • addedInput schema / properties / event_name / description
      Added value: +"Event name to test, as for send_event, e.g. `order.shipped`."
    • addedInput schema / properties / recipient / description
      Added value: +"External id of an existing recipient; unlike send_event, an unknown id is not created."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true/openWorldHint=false, and the description is consistent while adding substantial context the annotations cannot convey: no side effects ('nothing is stored or sent'), an admin-key requirement with a 403 failure mode for agent keys, and a 404 when the recipient does not exist.

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?

Well front-loaded: the dry-run purpose and the send_event relationship come first, followed by auth behavior and the return shape. The return-field enumeration is dense but earns its place since there is no output schema.

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 no output schema, the description compensates by naming the returned `rules` fields (rule, matched, status, reason, digest_id) and cross-referencing get_event's `outcome`. Auth, failure modes, and side-effect behavior are all covered.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description still adds value by clarifying that recipient must be an existing id (unlike send_event, no creation) and that data mirrors send_event input, plus the 404 behavior tied to that parameter.

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?

States a precise verb and scope: dry-run an event for a person, showing which rules fire and why others do not. It is immediately distinguishable from send_event (which actually sends) and get_event (which reads a stored event).

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?

Explicitly says to use it before send_event to verify a rule reaches the person, notes nothing is stored or sent, and gives a hard exclusion: agent keys get 403 and should read get_event instead. Both the when-to-use and the when-not-to-use with an alternative are spelled out.

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