AI Collaboration MCP Server

start_autonomous_loop

Continuously check for and process work tasks in an autonomous loop with configurable intervals and modes for AI collaboration.

Instructions

Start an autonomous work loop that continuously checks for and processes work

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "agentName": "<agentName>"
    },
    "name": "start_autonomous_loop"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`mode`	No	Type of autonomous loop
`agentName`	Yes	Name of the agent starting the loop
`checkInterval`	No	Seconds between checks (default: 30)
`maxIterations`	No	Maximum loop iterations (default: 100)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Apr 12, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It mentions the loop runs continuously, but does not disclose blocking behavior, how to stop it (despite sibling 'stop_autonomous_loop'), potential side effects, error handling, or performance implications. This is a significant gap for a long-running process.

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 a single sentence that is front-loaded with the action. It is concise with no wasted words, though it could benefit from slightly more detail for clarity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool starts a potentially long-running loop but has no output schema; the description does not explain return values, how to monitor progress (despite sibling 'get_loop_status'), or termination behavior. Given the complexity and 4 parameters, the description is incomplete.

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 the baseline is 3. The description does not add any meaning beyond the schema; it does not elaborate on the enum values (mode) or default values for numeric parameters. The agent would rely solely on the schema descriptions.

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 clearly states the verb 'Start' and the resource 'autonomous work loop', and explains what the loop does: 'continuously checks for and processes work'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'stop_autonomous_loop' and 'get_loop_status' by focusing on starting the loop, though not explicitly naming alternatives.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to start a loop vs. other tasks like 'send_directive' or 'review_work'). There are no conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions mentioned.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.