ContextBoundary MCP gateway with compiled policy enforcement
Both tools have severely incomplete definitions. Tool schemas are present but minimal, input parameters lack type definitions, descriptions are vague and under 20 chars, and output schemas are entirely undocumented. No parameter descriptions exist. Tool names use a namespace prefix (boundary/) but lack clear action verbs. Error handling, validation guidance, and recovery paths are absent. This server does not meet baseline quality for production agent use.
Evaluate an action against the boundary policy within an active session
Start a boundary session with an intent envelope declared by the accountable owner
Input schemas lack type definitions. Both tools define parameters as bare objects with only 'description' fields; no 'type', 'properties', 'required', or 'additionalProperties' are visible. JSON Schema is incomplete.
Tool descriptions are under 20 characters and provide no actionable context. 'Start a boundary session...' and 'Evaluate an action...' do not explain WHEN to use each tool, what prerequisites exist, or what the return value contains.
No output schemas documented. LLMs cannot infer what fields are returned, their types, or how to chain results to downstream tools. This blocks composition and forces agents to guess.
Inferred effective spec: <=2025-11-25.
| Scored | Grade | Overall | Spec posture | Rubric |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-09-23 | F | 30 | <=2025-11-25 | v2 |
Parameter descriptions are missing entirely. The 'intent_envelope' and 'action' parameters have only a type hint; no guidance on structure, required fields, valid values, or format constraints.
No error handling or recovery guidance. No indication of which errors are retryable, which require user intervention, or what the agent should do if a call fails.