close_ticket
Close a support ticket by providing its unique ID to mark it as resolved.
Instructions
Close a ticket.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ticket_id | Yes |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Close a support ticket by providing its unique ID to mark it as resolved.
Close a ticket.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ticket_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Close a ticket.' without stating irreversibility, side effects, or required permissions. Completely inadequate.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Extremely brief (2 words) but underspecified. Conciseness is not just shortness; this fails to provide necessary detail. Score 2 for under-specification.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Despite having an output schema, the description lacks all context: usage, parameter meaning, behavioral notes. For a simple tool, more is needed to ensure correct invocation.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description provides no information about the single parameter 'ticket_id'. The schema defines it, but the description adds zero value.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description 'Close a ticket.' is a direct restatement of the tool name 'close_ticket', providing no additional information. It is a tautology, so score 1.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like assign_ticket or restore. No context on prerequisites or exclusions. Score 2 for no guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/tachyurgy/mcp-app-harness'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server