Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
junai-mcp

junai-mcp

by saajunaid
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

notify_orchestrator

Records completed pipeline stages and requests the next deterministic transition, preventing hallucinated routing in multi-agent workflows.

Instructions

Record stage completion and ask pipeline-runner for deterministic next transition.

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": {
      "stage_completed": "<stage_completed>",
      "result_status": "<result_status>"
    },
    "name": "notify_orchestrator"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
artefact_pathNo
result_statusYes
result_payloadNo
stage_completedYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.18

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'deterministic next transition' but lacks details on side effects, idempotency, auth needs, or effects of multiple calls.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the core action. However, it could include more detail without sacrificing conciseness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the complexity (4 parameters, no annotations, output schema not described), the description is severely incomplete. It omits parameter meanings, return behavior, and usage context, making it insufficient for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, yet the description adds no meaning to parameters. It does not explain artefact_path, result_status, result_payload, or stage_completed, leaving the agent without necessary context.

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 tool's purpose: recording stage completion and asking for the next transition. It uses specific verbs and resources, distinguishing it from siblings like get_pipeline_status or satisfy_gate.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The implication is after stage completion, but no exclusions or comparisons with siblings like satisfy_gate or skip_stage.

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