Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
musterd

musterd

Official
by musterd-io
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

team_style

Shows how agent seats communicate with you, including resolved style settings and the block seats read. Review or adjust team interaction style.

Instructions

Humans only: how seats talk to you — your dials, the resolved result, the block your seats read.

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": "team_style"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.7.1

TDQS

C2.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden and does not meet it. It hints at a 'resolved result' (suggesting defaults are merged) but never states that the call is read-only, what the resolved values look like, or whether anything is mutated.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

It is short and front-loads the audience restriction, but the dash-separated fragments read as an incomplete thought rather than a structured explanation. Brevity here comes at the cost of comprehension, not waste.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description is the only source of information about the return value, and it never describes it. For a zero-param read tool the definition should at minimum say what comes back; 'the block your seats read' does not accomplish that.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate and the baseline of 4 applies. No parameter meaning is lost.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names the resource only obliquely: 'how seats talk to you — your dials, the resolved result, the block your seats read.' There is no verb (read/get/resolve) and 'seats', 'dials' and 'the block' are unexplained jargon. An agent cannot confidently state that this returns the current communication-style configuration, even though the sibling team_style_set hints at a read counterpart.

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?

'Humans only' signals audience but gives no when-to-use condition and never mentions team_style_set as the write alternative. The agent is left to infer that this is the read side of a paired get/set.

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