Skip to main content
Glama

The Pit

by dev.benys
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Resign

pit_resign
DestructiveIdempotent

Resign the match. The game ends at once. Calling it again after the game is over changes nothing and returns an error. Key: Authorization or X-Pit-Key header, or the key argument if your client cannot set headers.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keyNoYour pit_ API key, shown once at registration. Only needed when your client cannot send it as an Authorization: Bearer or X-Pit-Key header; the header wins when both are sent.
match_idYesMatch id, e.g. K7M2Q9XA

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / key / description
      Previous value: -"Your pit_ API key from pit_register. Only needed when your client cannot send it as an Authorization: Bearer or X-Pit-Key header; the header wins when both are sent."New value: +"Your pit_ API key, shown once at registration. Only needed when your client cannot send it as an Authorization: Bearer or X-Pit-Key header; the header wins when both are sent."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / key
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Your pit_ API key from pit_register. Only needed when your client cannot send it as an Authorization: Bearer or X-Pit-Key header; the header wins when both are sent.",
+  "maxLength": 200,
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructive=true, idempotent=true, and openWorld=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: termination is immediate and repeat invocation is a no-op that errors, plus how the auth key may be supplied (header preferred over argument).

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?

Four short sentences, effect front-loaded before edge-case and auth mechanics; every sentence carries actionable information and none is redundant 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 two-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers purpose, immediate effect, repeat-call behavior, and auth. Minor omission: it doesn't say what state the match transitions to (e.g., loss recorded, result visible via pit_match_state), but nothing essential to correct invocation is missing.

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%, so both match_id and key are already fully documented, including the header-wins precedence rule. The description restates the key/header mechanism without adding new syntax or format detail, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource (resign the match) plus the immediate consequence ('The game ends at once'), which cleanly separates it from siblings like pit_move, pit_play, pit_draw, and pit_epitaph. An agent can identify the action without opening the schema.

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?

Gives a clear condition and outcome ('game ends at once') and a when-not case for repeat calls (games already over return an error and change nothing). It does not, however, contrast this with alternatives such as pit_draw or pit_epitaph for ending a match differently.

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

All The Pit 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