Skip to main content
Glama

Aura

by dev.rohnelt.aura

Wait for something (burns zero tokens)

await

Block on an open HTTP connection until a trigger fires — an email arrives, a webhook is hit, another agent signals you, or a deadline passes. Returns the instant it happens. If nothing fires before the timeout, the call is refunded: you are only charged when something is actually delivered.

When to use: Call INSTEAD of polling in a loop. A poll loop costs a full inference per iteration; waiting inside this single call costs you nothing beyond the flat fee. Use it for verification codes, callbacks and approvals that land within minutes.

Price: US$0.004000 per call. This call blocks until it resolves; waiting inside it costs you no tokens.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
onYesWhat to wait for.
timeout_secondsNo
lookback_secondsNoAlso match events that arrived this many seconds BEFORE the call. Covers the gap between submitting a form and starting to wait. Raise it if you were slow to call.

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses important behavior: the call blocks, returns the instant a trigger fires, is refunded on timeout, and charges a flat fee while burning zero tokens during the wait. The openWorldHint is consistent with waiting on external events, and readOnlyHint=false is not contradicted given the billing/blocking side effects.

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 well-structured and front-loaded with the core behavior, followed by usage guidance and pricing. Minor redundancy exists between 'burns zero tokens,' the refund statement, and the explicit flat fee line, but overall every section earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description covers triggers, cost, timeout refunds, and when to use the tool. However, there is no output schema and the description does not explain what the tool returns beyond 'returns the instant it happens,' leaving the response payload and timeout outcome ambiguous.

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?

The schema already documents two of three parameters well, and the description reinforces the trigger categories but adds little semantic detail about timeout_seconds or how extraction works. The pricing/refund context is useful, but parameter-level meaning is mostly left to the schema.

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?

The description opens with a concrete action—blocking on an open HTTP connection—and names all four trigger types (email, webhook, signal, deadline). It clearly differentiates await from sibling tools like inbox_read or signal by framing it as a blocking wait rather than a fetch or send operation.

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?

There is an explicit 'When to use' section telling the agent to call this instead of polling in a loop, with concrete scenarios like verification codes, callbacks, and approvals. It does not name sibling alternatives directly or state when not to use it, but the guidance is clear and actionable.

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

All Aura toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool addresses a distinct resource or action: memory operations are clearly separated from inbox operations, await/park/resume are differentiated by whether the process stays alive or hands off state, and administrative calls like capabilities, whoami, and credit_deposit have non-overlapping purposes. No two tools appear interchangeable.

Naming Consistency3/5

Most resource operations follow an object_verb pattern (memory_get, hook_create, inbox_list), but core primitives like await, park, resume, and signal are bare verbs, while capabilities and whoami are bare nouns. The style is consistently lowercase snake_case and readable, but the naming convention is mixed rather than uniform.

Tool Count4/5

At 16 tools the set is just past the typical well-scoped range, but each tool maps to a distinct platform capability: identity, inbox, memory, hooks/signals, parking, and billing. It feels slightly heavy rather than bloated.

Completeness4/5

The core agent workflow is covered end to end: identity creation, credit deposit, hook creation, awaiting triggers, inbox reading, durable memory, and the park/resume round-trip. Minor gaps remain—there is no hook list/delete and no way to cancel a parked state—but they can be worked around rather than blocking.

Resources