Skip to main content
Glama

Finish work

finish_work
Idempotent

End your work when it is done (completed) or when you stop (abandoned). History shows it finished, and later writes naming it are refused. Repeating it is harmless.

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": {
      "workId": "<workId>",
      "outcome": "<outcome>"
    },
    "name": "finish_work"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
workIdYesThe workId begin_work returned.
outcomeYesUse abandoned when stopping without finishing what the user asked for.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false), the description discloses real consequences: history records the work as finished, later writes naming it are refused, and repeating the call is harmless. That post-call state change is exactly the context an agent needs before committing.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and its trigger, followed by the consequences. Nothing is redundant or padded.

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?

For a two-parameter terminal tool with no output schema, the description covers trigger, outcome choice, post-call state, and idempotency. An agent has everything needed to call it correctly and understand the result.

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 coverage is 100% and both parameters are documented in the schema, including the abandoned-vs-completed distinction. The description reinforces the outcome semantics but adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 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 states a specific verb and resource ('End your work') and enumerates the two terminal outcomes, completed and abandoned. It is clearly distinguishable from the read-oriented siblings, though it does not name its counterpart begin_work explicitly.

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 gives clear conditions for calling: when the work is done or when you stop. The outcome enum is tied to those conditions, so an agent knows which value to pick. No exclusions or alternatives are needed here since no sibling performs the same terminal 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