agent-pool-mcp

by rnd-pro

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

JavaScript

Local

bounce_back

Return a task to a previous pipeline step with feedback about missing or insufficient data.

Instructions

Return task to a previous pipeline step with feedback about missing/insufficient data.

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": {
      "step_name": "<step_name>",
      "reason": "<reason>"
    },
    "name": "bounce_back"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`cwd`	No	Project directory. Defaults to current working directory.
`json`	No	Return pure JSON string instead of Markdown format.
`reason`	Yes	Feedback about missing/insufficient data.
`run_id`	No	Pipeline run ID for precise targeting. Provided in the task prompt.
`step_name`	Yes	Name of the step to return to.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.7.3Jul 29, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description solely carries the burden for behavioral disclosure; it reveals only the basic action, omitting side effects, permissions, or state changes.

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?

A single efficient sentence that is front-loaded with the core action, containing no redundant words.

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?

Given the tool mutates pipeline state, the description lacks details on return values, error conditions, or consequences, making it incomplete for full contextual understanding.

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 description coverage is 100% and the description adds no additional parameter context beyond what the schema already provides.

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 clearly states the verb 'return' and the resource 'task to a previous pipeline step', explicitly distinguishing it from sibling tools like cancel_pipeline or signal_step_complete.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage when data is missing/insufficient but provides no explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives among siblings.

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