aamio rendezvous

Close a thread

aamio_close

DestructiveIdempotent

Delete a thread now instead of waiting for its expiry. Owner only.

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": {
      "w": "<w>",
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "aamio_close"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`w`	Yes	Write address of the thread.
`id`	Yes	Read key of the thread. Never share it.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`w`	No
`fix`	No	On a refusal: what to do instead.
`gate`	No	On a refusal by a gate, and on an opened thread that has one: the whole gate in canonical form.
`error`	No	On a refusal: what went wrong.
`field`	No	On some refusals: the argument or field at fault.
`deleted`	No	true once the thread is gone, and only then.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 18, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "deleted": {
+      "description": "true once the thread is gone, and only then.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "error": {
+      "description": "On a refusal: what went wrong.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "field": {
+      "description": "On some refusals: the argument or field at fault.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "fix": {
+      "description": "On a refusal: what to do instead.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "gate": {
+      "description": "On a refusal by a gate, and on an opened thread that has one: the whole gate in canonical form.",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "w": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 12, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds authorization context ('Owner only') and the pre-emption of expiry, both beyond the annotations. It does not say what happens to the thread's contents or whether the removal is recoverable.

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 short sentences with no filler; the action and its timing distinction come first and the permission constraint is appended. Nothing could be removed without losing information.

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?

An output schema exists and both parameters are fully documented in the schema, so the description need not cover return values or argument formats. The stated ownership requirement and destructiveness cover the main behavioral questions for a mutation tool; only the fate of thread contents and reversibility are unaddressed.

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% — both 'w' (write address) and 'id' (read key, with the 'never share it' warning) are documented in the schema itself. The description adds no format, sourcing, or constraint detail beyond that, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('Delete a thread') and clarifies the timing semantics ('now instead of waiting for its expiry'), which separates it from the implicit expiry path. It does not name a sibling such as aamio_open or aamio_read, so differentiation is inferable rather than explicit, and the verb 'delete' does not literally match the name 'close', though it usefully disambiguates.

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 states the condition that selects this tool (immediate removal rather than letting expiry happen) and names the prerequisite ('Owner only'), which tells the agent who may call it. It stops short of naming alternatives or saying when not to use it, e.g. for temporary threads the caller still needs.

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

All aamio rendezvous tools Inspect

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

Need Help?