productplan-mcp-server

by olgasafonova

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Local

check_status

Read-only

Verify ProductPlan API connectivity and authentication to resolve 'Is ProductPlan connected?' queries.

Instructions

Check ProductPlan API status and authentication.

USE WHEN: "Is ProductPlan connected?", "Check API" For MCP server internals (cache stats, rate limits), use health_check instead.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes	The ProductPlan payload (object or array) returned by the API, passed through verbatim
`summary`	Yes	Human-readable summary of the result (e.g. "Found 3 roadmaps")

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv6.0.0Sep 25, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "description": "The ProductPlan payload (object or array) returned by the API, passed through verbatim",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "summary": {
+      "description": "Human-readable summary of the result (e.g. \"Found 3 roadmaps\")",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "summary",
+    "data"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv5.0.0Mar 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is known. The description adds meaningful context by specifying that this checks both connectivity status and authentication, and clarifies the boundary against health_check. With no destructive behavior and an output schema present, the description sufficiently covers behavior.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by concise usage triggers and a clear pointer to the alternative. Every line earns its place with no redundant detail.

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 a parameterless status-check tool with an output schema and readOnlyHint annotation, this description is fully complete. It tells the agent what the tool does, when to use it, and when to choose health_check instead, leaving no critical gaps.

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 has zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%, so there is nothing for the description to add about parameter meanings. The baseline for a no-parameter tool is 4, and the description does not need to compensate for any schema gaps.

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 action—checking ProductPlan API status and authentication—on a clear resource. It also names the sibling health_check as a different tool for server internals, distinguishing this tool from the most likely confusable alternative.

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?

The description explicitly provides USE WHEN examples ('Is ProductPlan connected?', 'Check API') and a clear exclusion: for MCP server internals like cache stats and rate limits, use health_check instead. This gives an agent unambiguous routing guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server