Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
AIWorkhub

AIWorkhub

by shrec
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

aiworkhub_manager_callback_lane_claim

Reclaims the callback lane for a verified manager by atomically updating the coordinator-target file so callbacks and task creation route to them again; refusals leave it unchanged and are audited.

Instructions

MANAGER WRITE: take the callback lane back for this verified manager.

Selects the caller's own verified provider and session in the repository's coordinator-target file (atomic replace, unrelated keys kept), so callbacks and aiworkhub_task_create route to this manager again. Refuses with a stable reason, leaving the file unchanged, when the caller has no verified route, is Codex without a live route, or another live Manager Chat or Codex route holds the lane. Every claim and refusal appends one audit row.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "aiworkhub_manager_callback_lane_claim"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.12.75

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses the key mutation behavior: atomic replacement in the coordinator-target file while preserving unrelated keys. It also explains refusal behavior, stable reasons, no file change on refusal, and audit-row creation for both success and refusal. This gives an agent substantial operational context for a write operation.

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 operation type and immediate goal, then adds file behavior, routing effect, refusal cases, and audit behavior in a compact block. Every sentence adds useful information and there is no redundant restatement of the tool name.

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 write tool with no parameters but meaningful side effects, the description covers the mutation target, atomicity, preservation of unrelated keys, refusal conditions, and audit logging. Because an output schema exists, it does not need to explain return values. An agent has enough information to decide whether to invoke it and what to expect.

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 takes no parameters, so there is no schema input to clarify. The description correctly implies that the caller and verified manager context are determined externally rather than passed as arguments. Baseline for a zero-parameter tool 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 states a specific action and resource: taking the callback lane back for a verified manager, selecting the caller's provider and session in the coordinator-target file. This is clearly distinct from sibling workflow tools such as callback wait/ack or task creation, because it describes claiming routing ownership rather than processing a callback or creating a task.

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 gives clear context for use: this re-routes callbacks and aiworkhub_task_create to the calling manager again. It also lists refusal conditions that define when the tool will not work. It stops short of naming a specific alternative tool when a manager does not hold a verified route, so it is not a full when-to-use/when-not guide.

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