Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
errorbar

errorbar

by omnia-v
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

create audit tombstone

create_audit_tombstone

Acknowledge a verified audit-chain gap by submitting a sequence number and written reason, so integrity checks stop flagging it as unexplained. Platform-admin action for repair, not concealment.

Instructions

Acknowledge a verified audit-chain gap with a written reason so the integrity check stops reporting it as unexplained; a platform-admin repair action, never a way to hide a gap. POST /v1/audit/tombstones (API-key scope: platform:write). Returns: 201 { seq, reason, created_at } Notes: 403 unless the key's minting user has the platform-level admin role (workspace OWNER/ADMIN is not enough). 400 for invalid JSON, wrong types, seq <= 0, reason under 10 chars, or a seq that is not a gap in the latest verification (message names when that verification ran, or that none has run yet).

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": {
      "seq": "<seq>",
      "reason": "<reason>"
    },
    "name": "create_audit_tombstone"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
seqYesPositive integer chain sequence number. Must appear as a problem of kind "gap" in the latest stored verification (see GET /v1/audit/verify) or the call is refused.
reasonYesWhy the slot was lost. Trimmed; at least 10 characters; stored up to 500 characters. Upserting an existing seq replaces the reason.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.5.1

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond annotations, the description discloses the upsert side effect ('Upserting an existing seq replaces the reason'), the exact API-key scope (platform:write), the 403 role restriction, the 201 return shape, and specific 400 failure modes. This is far richer than the annotation set alone and gives the agent a precise behavioral model.

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?

Every sentence contributes: purpose, endpoint/scope, return shape, auth requirement, and error conditions. The purpose is front-loaded and the technical details are packed into efficient clauses without repetition or filler.

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 provides the 201 response fields and error cases. It covers authentication, side effects, and preconditions. Nothing needed to call the tool correctly is missing, and the reference to GET /v1/audit/verify in the schema complements the description.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% with detailed descriptions for both seq and reason, so the schema carries the parameter meaning. The description reinforces the same constraints (seq must be a gap, reason >= 10 chars) but does not add material new semantics beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Acknowledge a verified audit-chain gap with a written reason' and explains the effect ('stops reporting it as unexplained'). It also characterizes itself as 'a platform-admin repair action', clearly separating it from read-only siblings like list_audit_tombstones and get_audit_verification.

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?

The description gives clear context: it is for verified gaps, requires platform-level admin, and 'never a way to hide a gap'. It enumerates 400 refusal conditions, so the agent knows when it will be rejected. It stops short of explicitly naming an alternative tool to use instead, but the conditions are strong enough to infer appropriate use.

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