Skip to main content
Glama

MCPFax Agent Continuity

Signal that your part is done

barrier_signal
Idempotent

Report that one participant finished, optionally attaching a payload the joiner will receive. FREE and IDEMPOTENT PER PARTICIPANT — the same participant_id signalling twice counts once and never double-fires the join. The barrier is a single Durable Object, so N simultaneous signals produce exactly one notification. A signal to a join that ALREADY FIRED on min_count is still recorded and reported in barrier_status, but it cannot fire a second notification — the joiner was already told, and was told exactly who was missing. A signal to a join that has TIMED OUT or passed its TTL is REFUSED with signalled:false, reason 'expired': your payload did NOT reach the joiner, so do not assume it did. That barrier_id is not locked — call barrier_create with it to open a new generation of the join. FREE — this tool never charges. Authenticate with Authorization: Bearer , or pass agent_key as an argument if your host cannot set headers. Equivalent HTTP route: POST /v1/barrier/signal.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
payloadNoOptional opaque result for the joiner, <=8192 bytes. Never parsed, indexed or logged. Example: '{"rows":128}'.
agent_keyNoYour agent_secret, if your MCP host cannot set the Authorization header. Prefer the header.
barrier_idYesThe barrier to signal. Example: 'quarterly-rollup-2026q3'.
participant_idYesWho is signalling. <=128 chars, stored in plain text so a timeout can name who is missing. Example: 'region-north'.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / agent_key / examples
      Added value: +[
      +  "the agent_secret that register returned"
      +]
  2. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / barrier_id / examples
      Added value: +[
      +  "quarterly-rollup-2026q3"
      +]
    • addedInput schema / properties / participant_id / examples
      Added value: +[
      +  "region-north"
      +]
    • addedInput schema / properties / payload / examples
      Added value: +[
      +  "{\"rows\":128}"
      +]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds extensive behavior beyond annotations: per-participant idempotency, exactly-one notification via a single Durable Object, behavior on already-fired joins, refusal on TTL expiry, non-locking of barrier_id, free usage, and authentication options. This meaningfully exceeds the idempotentHint annotation.

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 longer than average but dense with necessary caveats. It opens with the core purpose and then layers edge-case behavior. The repeated emphasis on FREE is slightly redundant but not harmful; every other sentence adds operational value.

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?

The description covers the key operational scenarios: normal signal, duplicate signal, already-fired join, timed-out join, and reuse of barrier_id. It also covers authentication. Given no output schema, it mentions the critical refusal outcome but does not describe the success response shape, which is a minor omission.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining participant_id idempotency, payload delivery to the joiner, expiry implications for payload, and the agent_key/header relationship. These nuances go beyond 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 action ('Report that one participant finished') and the resource (a barrier, identified by barrier_id), and distinguishes the semantics of a signal from other barrier operations. It does not explicitly compare itself to siblings like barrier_create or barrier_status, so it lacks explicit sibling differentiation.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description gives strong context about when a signal is valid (fired, expired) but does not advise when to choose this tool over siblings. There is no explicit when-to-use/alternatives guidance, though the implied usage is clear from the action.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources