Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
AIWorkhub

AIWorkhub

by shrec
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

aiworkhub_task_codex_handoff_markdown

Read-only

Builds a read-only Codex handoff report for tasks awaiting review, rendered as compact Markdown so Codex can read the review packet directly instead of parsing JSON.

Instructions

READ-ONLY: Codex-ready HANDOFF report rendered as compact Markdown.

Builds the same B116 handoff report as aiworkhub_task_codex_handoff (via the identical read-only review-queue + show calls, never a write command) and adds a deterministic markdown field — a compact review packet Codex can read directly instead of manually parsing the JSON.

FROZEN READ-ONLY CONTRACT — no write-gate toggle, no mutation parameters. Never calls taskctl done/review/start/auto-pickup/add-card. Never mutates queue or audit state. Never launches agents or processes. Writes remain default-off regardless of input values.

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_task_codex_handoff_markdown"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
task_idsNoOnly report these task ids; omit for every task waiting in the review queue.
batch_labelNoFree-text label echoed back as batch_label in the reply; it does not filter anything.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.12.67
    • addedInput schema / properties / batch_label / description
      Added value: +"Free-text label echoed back as batch_label in the reply; it does not filter anything."
    • addedInput schema / properties / task_ids / description
      Added value: +"Only report these task ids; omit for every task waiting in the review queue."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety baseline is covered; the description still adds real specifics beyond that — it enumerates the forbidden commands (done/review/start/auto-pickup/add-card), asserts no agent or process launches, and notes the markdown field is deterministic. The "writes default-off regardless of input values" line is slightly confusing noise, but the mutation surface is thoroughly disclosed.

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?

Front-loaded with the most important fact (READ-ONLY + what it produces) and organized into a purpose paragraph plus a contract paragraph. The third paragraph partly restates the read-only claim already implied by the first two, costing some tightness but not obscuring the payload.

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?

With an output schema present, the description needn't explain return values, and it does specify the notable non-schema output trait (a deterministic `markdown` field). Parameters and read-only guarantees are all covered, so nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 both parameters (`task_ids`, `batch_label`) are well documented in the schema, including that `batch_label` does not filter. The description only asserts there are no mutation parameters, adding nothing about how inputs shape the report — correct baseline given the schema does the work.

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 first line states a specific verb, resource, and output form ("Codex-ready HANDOFF report rendered as compact Markdown"), and the second explicitly anchors it to the sibling `aiworkhub_task_codex_handoff` it mirrors plus its added `markdown` field. An agent can tell exactly what this returns without opening the schema.

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 names the alternative and the selecting condition: use this when the consumer is Codex, which "can read directly instead of manually parsing the JSON" of `aiworkhub_task_codex_handoff`. It never states when the plain JSON sibling is the better pick, so the routing is clear in one direction only.

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