Skip to main content
Glama
nika110

OpenHuddle

by nika110
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

team_settings

Read or change team collaboration rules: task assignment, prompt approval, file-claim mode, claim duration, team lead, personal strengths, and auto-response.

Instructions

Read or change how the team works, when your user asks. Team-wide rules can only be changed by the team owner: assign_mode (self: people pick tasks, agent: the lead assigns, hybrid: the lead proposes and each person accepts), master_prompt_approval (all, majority or owner), claim_mode (ask: pause and ask the user before editing a file a teammate holds, block: refuse, warn: only tell) and claim_ttl_min (how long claims last). Anyone can set lead (who the lead, the main agent, is) and my_strengths (what you are good at, used for assignments). auto_respond is personal: whether your agent answers waiting questions and huddles before it finishes a turn.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
leadNoTeammate's name to make lead (main agent).
actionYesWhat to do.
claim_modeNoWhat happens when you try to edit a file a teammate holds.
assign_modeNoHow tasks get assigned.
auto_respondNoYours only (Claude Code): before finishing a turn, answer teammates' questions and huddles waiting for you. On by default.
my_strengthsNoWhat you are good at, e.g. "frontend, design".
claim_ttl_minNoMinutes a claim lasts without activity.
master_prompt_approvalNoWho must approve the master prompt.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.4.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / auto_respond
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Yours only (Claude Code): before finishing a turn, answer teammates' questions and huddles waiting for you. On by default.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose meaningful behavior: owner-only mutation for assign_mode/master_prompt_approval/claim_mode/claim_ttl_min versus unrestricted lead/my_strengths, and a stated default for auto_respond. It does not say what happens on permission failure or whether changes are reversible, so it is not complete.

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?

The opening sentence is well front-loaded, but everything after it is a single dense paragraph that interleaves permission rules, enum semantics, and personal-scope notes. The content mostly earns its place, yet a bulleted or grouped layout would make it far easier to parse.

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?

For an 8-parameter read/write settings tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the permission model, per-parameter semantics, and defaults, which is enough for an agent to call it correctly. Only the shape of the `get` response is left implicit, a minor gap.

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, but the description genuinely adds meaning beyond the terse schema strings by explaining each enum branch (self/agent/hybrid, ask/block/warn, all/majority/owner) and the unit of claim_ttl_min. It omits guidance on whether parameters are all sent together or merged with existing values.

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 pair and resource ("Read or change how the team works") and enumerates exactly which settings are covered, so an agent can distinguish it from action siblings like team_post, claim, or master_prompt. It does not explicitly name those siblings as alternatives, which keeps it below a 5.

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?

Provides a real invocation gate ("when your user asks") and, more usefully, a permission model that tells the agent in advance which settings are owner-only, which anyone can set, and which are personal. It stops short of stating when not to call it or naming an alternative tool for team-wide rule changes.

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