Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
AIWorkhub

AIWorkhub

by shrec
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

aiworkhub_manager_loop_status

Read-only

Read the active manager session, check whether a turn is running, inspect queued owner sends and review the last turn's outcome to monitor or debug the automation loop.

Instructions

MANAGER READ: the active session, whether a turn is running, queued owner sends, and the last turn's outcome.

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_loop_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe non-mutating call, so the description's main added value is listing the four pieces of state it surfaces. That is useful scoping context, but it largely restates what the output schema would already enumerate, and it says nothing about freshness, staleness, or behavior when no loop is active.

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?

A single sentence with the read-only framing front-loaded and the returned state items following immediately. No filler, though the fragment structure is terse enough to read slightly telegraphic.

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

Completeness4/5

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

The tool takes no arguments, carries both annotations, and has an output schema, so the description only needs to convey scope and it does. Only a note on behavior when no loop is running would make it fully complete.

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?

Zero parameters, so per the rubric the baseline is 4. There is nothing for the description to disambiguate, and the sentence does not waste space inventing parameter guidance.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names a specific read operation and enumerates exactly what it reports: active session, running turn, queued owner sends, and last turn outcome. That is more informative than a bare 'loop status', though it never contrasts itself with nearby siblings like loop_events, supervisor_loop_status, or session_current_state.

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 'MANAGER READ:' prefix signals this is a read-only status snapshot, which implies when it would be called, but there is no explicit 'use this when...' guidance and no routing away from the several sibling loop/session status tools. Usage is inferred rather than stated.

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