Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
aspa-mcp

aspa-mcp

by octos-ai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

Assumir conversa

aspa_assume
DestructiveIdempotent

Take over a support conversation assigned to no one or another agent, required before replying, and only after explicit approval; this action is visible to the customer or team.

Instructions

Assume (take) a conversation by clicking 'Assumir' in the Aspa panel: works for conversations without an agent and for conversations assigned to another agent. Required before replying to a conversation that is not yours. This is a real action visible to the customer or the team. Only call it after the user explicitly approved this exact action in the conversation.

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": {
      "contact": "<contact>"
    },
    "name": "aspa_assume"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
indexNoIndex from aspa_list_conversations, only to tell apart contacts with the same name.
contactYesContact name exactly as listed. Required for every action that changes a conversation.
conversation_idNoconversation_id returned by aspa_read_conversation. When given, the action is refused if the open conversation is a different one.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.8.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already flag the action as destructive, non-read-only, open-world, and idempotent. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations: the action is visible to the customer/team and requires explicit user approval in the conversation. It does not disclose failure modes or side effects in detail, but the approval and visibility notes are meaningful behavioral additions.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core action and conditions, then adds critical safety context. Every sentence earns its place: it covers scope, prerequisite, visibility, and approval requirement without redundancy.

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 three-parameter action tool with no output schema, the description provides enough context: what the tool does, when it is required, and the explicit approval constraint. It does not explain return values or failure behavior, but with annotations covering safety signals, it is adequately complete.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add meaning about the parameters (contact, index, conversation_id) beyond what the schema already provides; it focuses on action semantics rather than parameter usage.

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?

The description states a specific verb ('Assume/take') and resource ('a conversation'), and clarifies it applies both to unassigned conversations and those assigned to another agent. It also implicitly distinguishes from replying by stating assumption is required before replying to a conversation that is not yours.

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 provides clear conditions for use: conversations without an agent or assigned to another agent, and as a prerequisite before replying to a conversation not yours. It also adds a strong approval requirement. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools (e.g., aspa_transfer) or state when not to use it.

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