Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
subtask

subtask

by tedin7
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

jev

Shows or changes the shared check policy (status, auto, manual, off) so operators control automatic checks of new final deliveries within the existing budget.

Instructions

Show or change the shared Jev policy: status | auto | manual | off. Only the operator changes the policy: do not switch it to obtain or avoid a check. Auto checks every new final delivery once within the existing budget; read that outcome in wait()/result before any manual review. All advice is consultative. Credentials are never accepted here: add or replace a key in a terminal with subtask jev setup (hidden input), never in chat, argv or a tool argument. Changes apply to new submissions in every configured CLI; no server reload is needed.

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": "jev"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actionNostatus

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so well: it discloses authorization constraints, security restrictions around credentials, the scope of policy changes (new submissions across all configured CLIs), and that no server reload is needed. It also explains the auto-check budget behavior and that advice is consultative.

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 purpose and packs important constraints into a compact set of sentences. It is dense but mostly purposeful, with only minor vagueness such as 'All advice is consultative'.

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 one-parameter policy tool with no annotations or output schema, the description is substantially complete: it covers purpose, authorization, security, and change scope. The main remaining gap is that it does not fully explain the semantics of each policy mode or what the status response contains.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for undocumented parameters. It lists the allowed policy modes ('status | auto | manual | off') and explains auto, but it does not define manual or off in detail or explicitly map these values to the 'action' parameter.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Show or change the shared Jev policy'. It lists the policy modes and points to wait()/result for related outcomes, but it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from siblings such as status or inspect beyond that mention.

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 gives explicit when/when-not guidance: 'Only the operator changes the policy: do not switch it to obtain or avoid a check.' It also tells the agent to read the auto-check outcome in wait()/result before manual review and specifies that credentials must be handled via terminal setup, not chat or tool arguments.

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