Skip to main content
Glama
talonicdev

talonic-mcp

Official
by talonicdev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussions(1)Admin
TypeScript
Remote

Submit Decision Task

talonic_submit_decision_task

Submit the final decision for a claimed task, validating the outcome against the required contract and resuming the run.

Instructions

Submit the decision for a claimed decision task; the platform verifies it transactionally and resumes the run.

USE WHEN: the decision is final. outcome must satisfy output_contract from the claim (plain JSON Schema, or the verdict_matrix / record_set envelope), evidence lists the package locators relied on (verbatim; [] only if the app allows unevidenced decisions), rationale is a short summary. Rejections are HTTP 422 with the reason and change nothing; the task stays claimed under your epoch, so fix and resubmit before the lease ends. NOT FOR: giving the task back undecided (talonic_release_decision_task) or declaring it undecidable (talonic_fail_decision_task). Stale epoch is HTTP 409. ARGS: task_id, execution_epoch, outcome, evidence, rationale, optional confidence and service_version. AUTH: a tlnc_ key needs a per-app 'decide' grant; an OAuth connector session needs the apps:decide scope (consented at connect) and a live workspace role of senior_member or above. A 403 (decide_grant_required, insufficient_scope, insufficient_tier) names what is missing — tell the user, do not retry.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
outcomeYesThe decision, shaped by output_contract from the claim: for a plain JSON Schema contract the object that schema validates; for a verdict_matrix contract { subjects: [{ subject_key, rule_outcomes, auto?, detail? }] }; for a record_set contract its fields-and-rows envelope.
task_idYesDecision task UUID.
evidenceYesProvenance locators the decision relied on, each copied verbatim from the input package (or a db:/ref: locator the app holds a read grant on). Required; [] is accepted only when the app allows unevidenced decisions.
rationaleYesShort decision rationale (a summary, never private chain-of-thought), up to 4,000 characters.
confidenceNoOptional confidence from 0 to 1.
execution_epochYesExecution epoch returned by the successful claim. Stale epochs are rejected with 409.
service_versionNoOptional build identifier of the deciding service; recorded as decided_by.label.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.1.81

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses transactional verification, state changes on rejection (nothing changes, task stays claimed), stale epoch 409, and detailed auth requirements (tlnc_ key with 'decide' grant, OAuth with apps:decide scope, senior_member role). No contradiction with annotations; this is thorough behavioral disclosure.

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 longer than average but well-organized into clear sections (purpose, USE WHEN, NOT FOR, ARGS, AUTH). Every sentence adds necessary context, and the most critical information (purpose and when to use) is front-loaded. It is structured and free of fluff, though slightly verbose for a single tool description.

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?

For a complex tool with 7 parameters, nested objects, and no output schema, the description covers usage conditions, auth requirements, error codes, and retry behavior. It does not describe the success response format, but that is not essential given the absence of an output schema and the transactional nature described. Overall, it provides sufficient context for correct invocation.

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%, so each parameter is already documented in the input schema. The description repeats key constraints (e.g., outcome must satisfy output_contract, evidence verbatim, [] only if allowed) but adds no new information beyond what the schema descriptions already provide. It does not compensate for any gaps, but none exist, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 the verb 'submit' and the resource 'decision task', explains the platform verifies transactionally and resumes the run, and explicitly differentiates from sibling tools by listing NOT FOR cases with their exact names. This leaves no ambiguity about what the tool does or how it differs from alternatives.

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?

Provides a dedicated USE WHEN section detailing the conditions (final decision, outcome satisfying output_contract, evidence verbatim, rationale short) and a NOT FOR section naming the two sibling tools to avoid. Also explains error handling (422, 409) and the retry behavior, giving explicit guidance on when to call and when to stop.

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