Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
AIWorkhub

AIWorkhub

by shrec
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

aiworkhub_task_plan_snapshot

Read-only

Inspect the task dependency DAG to review ready work, blockers, write-scope overlaps, and DAG validity, or return the full graph for historical dependency and layer analysis.

Instructions

READ-ONLY: bounded Plan-DAG summary, or the complete DAG with full.

Use this for the dependency DAG across cards; use aiworkhub_task_list for a flat card list by status.

Default mode reports actionable lifecycle, ready work, blockers, write-scope overlaps, orphaned processing and DAG validity without repeating every finished card's dependency history. Use full=true for exact historical dependency/layer inspection. This tool never claims work; the write-gated claim tool and its read-only preview remain the claim surfaces.

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_plan_snapshot"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fullNoSet true to return the complete Plan-DAG for exact historical dependency and layer inspection; default false returns the bounded summary.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.12.67
    • addedInput schema / properties / full / description
      Added value: +"Set true to return the complete Plan-DAG for exact historical dependency and layer inspection; default false returns the bounded summary."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

readOnlyHint=true is already declared, so the safety profile is covered by annotations; the description still adds real context by enumerating what the default mode reports (actionable lifecycle, ready work, blockers, write-scope overlaps, orphaned processing, DAG validity) and by stating it omits finished cards' dependency history. The explicit non-claiming disclaimer further clarifies side-effect boundaries well beyond the annotations. It does not state any result-size limits or truncation behavior for the 'bounded' mode, which keeps it short of a 5.

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 key distinction and the read-only status are front-loaded in the first line, and each subsequent sentence covers a distinct concern (alternative tool, mode behavior, claim-surface disclaimer). Slight density and inline markup aside, there is little waste.

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, return-value detail is not required, and the description covers tool selection, mode selection, and side-effect scope for a one-parameter read tool. The only minor gap is the unnamed 'write-gated claim tool', which an agent must infer from the sibling list.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the single parameter's schema description already explains true/false behavior, so the baseline is 3. The description adds intent-level meaning beyond the schema by tying full=true to a specific inspection purpose (exact historical dependency and layer inspection) and framing the default as a de-duplicated summary.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'READ-ONLY: bounded Plan-DAG summary, or the complete DAG with full.' It then explicitly distinguishes itself from aiworkhub_task_list ('flat card list by status'), so an agent can separate the two without opening either schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It names the alternative and the condition that selects it: use this for the dependency DAG, use aiworkhub_task_list for a flat list by status. It also gives the trigger for the second mode ('Use full=true for exact historical dependency/layer inspection'), covering both tool choice and parameter choice.

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