Skip to main content
Glama
tbranzov

HAOps MCP Server

by tbranzov

haops_transition_skill

Execute lifecycle actions (propose, publish, deprecate) on skills. Admin-only, enforces state machine with 409 on disallowed transitions.

Instructions

Transition a skill through its lifecycle (propose / publish / deprecate). Hits POST /api/skills/[name]/[action]. The server enforces the allowed-from-here state machine — on a disallowed transition you get a 409 with from, to, and the allowed set listed in the response. Admin-only, requires ENABLE_COMPOSED_PROTOCOLS=true on the server. For project-scope skills pass scope="project" + projectSlug.

WARNING: The parameter is named action (values: propose/publish/deprecate) — NOT status or targetStatus. The underlying model field is called status, but the transition route uses action as the URL segment and the tool param name.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesKebab-case skill name to transition.
scopeYesScope of the target skill. "system" omits projectSlug; "project" requires it.
actionYesLifecycle action to perform. Must be one of: "propose" (draft → proposed), "publish" (proposed → published), "deprecate" (published → deprecated). NOTE: this param is named `action`, NOT `status` or `targetStatus`.
verboseNoIf true, return the full API response instead of the compact summary (default: false)
projectSlugNoProject slug — REQUIRED when scope="project"; MUST be omitted when scope="system".
Behavior5/5

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

Without annotations, the description fully covers behavioral aspects: server-enforced state machine, error response details (409 with allowed transitions), admin-only requirement, and the warning about parameter naming. It also notes side effects of transitions.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise yet informative, with key points front-loaded: purpose, actions, and critical warnings. Every sentence adds value without repetition.

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?

No output schema, but the tool is straightforward. The description covers error handling, state machine, and configuration requirements. Slightly less complete due to missing return value details, but still adequate.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning: explains action enum values, scope and projectSlug relationship, verbose behavior, and warns about parameter naming. This enriches understanding beyond the schema.

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 explicitly states the action: 'Transition a skill through its lifecycle (propose / publish / deprecate).' It uses the verb 'transition' and mentions the resource 'skill lifecycle'. It distinguishes itself from siblings like haops_deprecate_skill and haops_create_skill by focusing on the lifecycle actions.

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?

The description provides clear usage context: 'Admin-only, requires ENABLE_COMPOSED_PROTOCOLS=true' and mentions project-scope handling. It warns about the parameter naming conflict. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool versus alternatives like haops_deprecate_skill.

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/tbranzov/haops-mcp-server'

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