Skip to main content
Glama
sipyourdrink-ltd

Bernstein - Multi-agent orchestration

bernstein_run_status

Poll a verifiable handle for a run started with bernstein_run using either the task_id or run_id returned by that call.

Instructions

Return a verifiable Tasks-extension handle for a run, by run id.

The handle's status is a pure projection of the run journal, and it embeds the run's audit-chain head so the client can later verify the task it watched corresponds to the audited run (bernstein audit verify or the offline verifier). Polling is stateless: any server instance reprojects the same handle from the on-disk journal. A poll that carries a progressToken also receives a notifications/progress tick derived from the journal fold, and only when the fold strictly advanced since the previous tick.

Args: run_id: The run to project. Either identifier bernstein_run returned is accepted: the task_id, or the run_id naming the journal. Resolution is journal run id first, then the task id slugified into a journal run id, so the two forms reach one journal and project an identical handle. Must be a plain identifier - path separators and traversal are refused. workdir: Project root directory (default: current directory).

Returns: JSON of the Tasks-extension task-handle body (taskId, runId, status, journalHead, chainHead, receiptHash, pollToken, ...).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
run_idYesThe run to project. Either the task_id or the run_id returned by bernstein_run. Resolved journal run id first, then the task id slugified into a journal run id, so both forms reach one journal.
workdirNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
_meterYes
resultYes
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: stateless polling, progress notification mechanism, run_id resolution rules (both task_id and run_id accepted, path traversal refused), and default workdir. This compensates for the lack of annotations.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and is well-structured with sections for arguments and returns. However, it is somewhat verbose (e.g., detailed explanation of run_id resolution), which could be tightened without losing clarity.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity, lack of annotations, and presence of an output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, parameter details, behavioral traits (stateless, progress), and return values. It is complete for an agent to use effectively.

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

Parameters5/5

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

The description adds significant meaning beyond the input schema for both parameters. For run_id, it explains the two accepted identifier forms and resolution priority. For workdir, it provides a default and purpose, whereas the schema lacks a description. This compensates for the 50% schema coverage.

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 that the tool returns a verifiable Tasks-extension handle for a run by run id, using specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from siblings like bernstein_status by emphasizing the verifiable handle and audit-chain head embedding.

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?

The description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like bernstein_status. It mentions stateless polling and progress notifications but lacks exclusion criteria or comparisons to sibling tools, leaving the agent without clear guidance on tool selection.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/sipyourdrink-ltd/bernstein'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server