Skip to main content
Glama

The Bridge

by dev.thebridge
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Turn Feature Flag On or Off

toggle_feature_flag
Idempotent

Quick-toggle a feature flag on or off by its KEY (no id lookup needed — this tool resolves it). enabled: true sets state="on", false sets state="off". Does not touch the flag's rule, values or schedule — for those use update_feature_flag. Fails with FLAG_NOT_FOUND when no flag has the given key, and with FLAG_HAS_TARGETING when the flag is state=on-with-rule and you try to turn it on, since that would widen it from the rule's audience to everyone — use update_feature_flag explicitly for that. Every gate in app code is a flag: flags are the standard way to control a route, an API endpoint, a feature or a piece of code. A feature a plan sells is also listed on the plan, and the flag's rule points at bridge:billing.entitlement.. Access by who someone is is a rule on a privilege (preferred) or a role; app code never reads a role, privileges, the plan or a plan feature itself. Numbers are plan quotas, not flags; permission on one specific record stays in app code. Full rule: get_integration_guide topic=fit-together. The result carries warnings when the flag cannot mean what it looks like — switched on while its onValue is false, or a rule on a plan or role the app does not have. A warning never blocks the write; read it and fix the flag. Before writing app code that consumes this, call get_integration_guide with topic=feature-flags and the framework the app uses.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
appNoId of the Bridge app to act on for this call (see list_apps). Omit to use the current app.
keyYesFlag KEY to switch (see list_feature_flags).
enabledYestrue = on, false = off.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations cover only the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false); the description adds far more — exact state mapping (enabled true→state="on"), the FLAG_NOT_FOUND and FLAG_HAS_TARGETING failure semantics with the reason the second exists, and the non-blocking `warnings` in the result. This is rich behavioral disclosure well beyond structured fields.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded correctly — the action, the key resolution, and the sibling exclusion come first. However, the mid-section domain lore ('Every gate in app code is a flag…', plan features, privileges vs roles, quotas) is conceptual background that does not help select or invoke this tool and is largely deferred to get_integration_guide anyway. It reads as over-stuffed for a two-argument toggle.

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

Completeness5/5

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

No output schema exists, yet the description compensates by explaining the `warnings` field in the result and the failure modes. Combined with annotations covering the safety profile, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly and interpret the response.

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, but the description adds real semantics: the `key` parameter is resolved without an id lookup (contrasted with get_flag/list_feature_flags), and `enabled` maps to concrete state values (true=\"on\", false=\"off\") rather than just the schema's terse 'true = on, false = off'. It exceeds the structured data without fully re-documenting every parameter.

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?

Starts with a specific verb+resource+mechanism: 'Quick-toggle a feature flag on or off by its KEY (no id lookup needed — this tool resolves it).' It explicitly distinguishes itself from the closest sibling, update_feature_flag, which handles rule/values/schedule. An agent can select this without opening any schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly states when-not (rule/values/schedule → use update_feature_flag), routes the agent to get_integration_guide topic=feature-flags before writing consuming app code, and names the error conditions (FLAG_NOT_FOUND, FLAG_HAS_TARGETING) that select a different path. Nothing is left to inference.

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

All The Bridge 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