tool_args call fix for A0 v1.6)

[ESP-Geek]

Summary

• Align validator with upstream Issue Inconsistent connection to another Agent0 enabled as an MCP server (Solved but Dev's need to review) #1400
• Require presence of tool_args (dictionary, empty {} allowed); accept legacy args as fallback when tool_args is absent (mapped to tool_args internally)
• Rationale: prevents false negatives for tools with no parameters and maintains backwards compatibility for older tool invocations

Implementation

• agent.py (validate_tool_request):
  • If tool_args is present: must be dict ({} allowed)
  • Else if args present: must be dict; mapped to tool_args
  • Else: raise ValueError("Tool request must have a tool_args (type dictionary) field")

Tests

• Added tests/tests_tool_request_validation.py covering:
  • Empty tool_args is accepted
  • Missing both tool_args and args is rejected
  • Legacy args={} is accepted and mapped
  • Non-dict tool_args and args are rejected
  • Missing tool_name is rejected

Documentation

• New: docs/developer/tool-requests.md — canonical schema and examples for tool requests (tool_name required; tool_args required; legacy args fallback explained)
• README: added link in developer docs table to the new page
• docs/developer/mcp-configuration.md: TIP box linking to tool-requests.md for MCP invocations

Fork branch with changes

• ESP-Geek/agent-zero@fix/validate-tool-args
• Latest commit (fork): https://github.com/ESP-Geek/agent-zero/commit/64bbd8ffad4231bf0951f78fbea1f70f1c291c45

Notes

• Title set per user request: "tool_args call fix for A0 v1.6)"
• Happy to add more tests or adjust messaging if reviewers prefer alternative error text or stricter deprecation notes.

[ESP-Geek]

Update after restart and follow-ups:\n\n- Added unit tests covering empty/missing tool_args and legacy args acceptance, plus negative cases for non-dict inputs: tests/test_tool_request_validation.py.\n- PR description updated with details and test coverage.\n- Attempted to request a GitHub Copilot review, but received 404 (likely permission or feature availability).\n\nKindly:\n- Trigger a Copilot review on this PR if available in this repo, or proceed with human review.\n- Apply appropriate labels (suggested: bug, core, validation, tests).\n- Assign reviewers as you see fit. If you prefer specific maintainers, we can request them explicitly once provided.