Skip to main content
Glama
theluckystrike

mcp-purchase-requisition

by theluckystrike
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Hybrid

Add a step to a purchase-requisition

purchase-requisition_item_add

Add a step to a purchase requisition checklist, marking it required or optional, with section and note. Returns the step's ID for tracking.

Instructions

Add one step to a purchase-requisition and return its I01-style id: text, an optional section heading, and required flag. A required step left unanswered or failed blocks sign-off; an optional one does not.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
noteNoGuidance printed under the step, e.g. the tolerance or the standard it is checked against
textYesThe step, as the person doing it will read it, e.g. Tyre pressures checked and recorded
sectionNoA heading to group this step under, e.g. Exterior. Steps keep the order they were added within a section
positionNoInsert at this 1-based position instead of at the end. Existing steps keep their ids
requiredNoWhether sign-off is blocked while this step is unanswered or failed. Default true
purchaseRequisitionYesThe purchase-requisition id, e.g. CL-0001, or its name when only one carries it

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.22.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark the call as a non-read, non-destructive write, and the description adds useful behavior beyond them: it returns an id and explains the sign-off consequences of a required step. This gives the agent a better model of what happens after invocation.

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?

Two compact sentences with no filler: the first states the action and return, the second clarifies the behavioral consequence. The key action is front-loaded.

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?

With six parameters fully documented in the schema, the description supplies the missing return-id behavior and the required/optional sign-off semantics. It does not address selection among sibling tools, but the title and parameter schema make the operation sufficiently clear.

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% and each parameter already has a meaningful description. The tool description repeats only that there is text, an optional section heading, and a required flag, adding little beyond the schema. Baseline 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 opens with a specific verb and resource ('Add one step to a purchase-requisition') and states the return value ('its I01-style id'). This makes it immediately distinguishable from sibling tools like purchase-requisition_create and purchase-requisition_item_remove.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The intended use is implied by the imperative 'Add one step to a purchase-requisition,' but there is no explicit when-to-use versus alternatives or any exclusion condition. An agent can infer the use case, but the description does not name sibling tools such as purchase-requisition_item_remove.

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