Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Cosend

by app.cosend
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Switch an automation on or off

set_automation_state
DestructiveIdempotent

Switches an automation on or off. state "disable" is the emergency stop: it takes effect at once and needs no confirmation. state "enable" switches it on, and from then on it acts on its own, so enabling needs a confirmed call: without confirmation_token the call is a preview that returns what would happen and a token for a person to approve; called again with that token, it enables. version_id (enable only) picks the version to run; the default is the newest one, which has to have been checked and deployed first.

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": {
      "id": "<id>",
      "state": "<state>"
    },
    "name": "set_automation_state"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe id in the resource path.
stateYesenable to switch the automation on, disable to switch it off.
version_idNo
confirmation_tokenNoFor a call that needs approval: left out, the call does nothing and returns a preview and a token; given that token, with the same arguments, the call does it.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / confirmation_token / description
      Previous value: -"Omit on the first call: you get a preview and a token back. Send the token on the second call to actually do it, and only after a human has approved the exact preview."New value: +"For a call that needs approval: left out, the call does nothing and returns a preview and a token; given that token, with the same arguments, the call does it."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (destructiveHint, idempotentHint), the description discloses the two-phase confirmation protocol in detail: a call without confirmation_token is a no-op preview that returns the projected effect plus a token, and a repeat call with that token performs the enable. It also warns that the default version must already have been checked and deployed, which is operationally critical context an agent could not infer from the schema.

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 core action and the emergency-stop semantics are front-loaded, and every clause carries information about behavior or preconditions. Sentences are long and dense, particularly the enable/confirmation sentence, which could be split for faster parsing, but there is no filler.

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 four-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers the safety-critical path: what disable does immediately, what the preview response contains, and the version precondition. It stops short of describing effects on in-flight runs when disabled or error behavior, which leaves minor gaps for an automation-control tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 75%, with version_id carrying only a pattern and no description; the description fills that gap by scoping version_id to enable-only, giving its default (newest) and the precondition that it be checked and deployed first. confirmation_token and state are largely restated rather than extended, so it adds real but uneven value.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource ("Switches an automation on or off") and immediately enumerates the two state values, so an agent knows exactly what the tool does. It does not explicitly contrast itself with nearby siblings such as deploy_automation, run_automation, or manage_automation, which keeps it from a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It clearly states the semantics of the two modes: disable is an immediate emergency stop, enable activates autonomous behavior and requires a confirmation cycle. What is missing is guidance on when an agent should choose this tool over deploy_automation/run_automation, and no exclusions are given, so it falls short of a 5.

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

All Cosend toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources