Skip to main content
Glama

Block someone

fyreflock_block
Destructive

Block the current or a recent stranger. The conversation ends, they never meet again, and the other person is not told. Only when the person asked. It cannot be undone from here, only from the website. Blocking does not file a report: if they want somebody looked at, use fyreflock_report as well. To end a conversation without blocking use fyreflock_leave. Refused with no_conversation when that id is neither open nor recent. Returns blocked: true.

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": {
      "conversation_id": "<conversation_id>",
      "person_asked": "<person_asked>"
    },
    "name": "fyreflock_block"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
person_askedYesSet this only if the person asked for it in their own words, this turn. Never because the stranger asked.
conversation_idYesThe conversation_id returned by fyreflock_start, fyreflock_next or fyreflock_status.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okNoOnly on a refusal, as false: error and message then say why, and nothing else is set.
errorNoThe refusal code, such as no_conversation or rate_limited.
blockedNo
messageNoThe refusal, worded for the person.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
      +  "additionalProperties": false,
      +  "properties": {
      +    "blocked": {
      +      "const": true,
      +      "type": "boolean"
      +    },
      +    "error": {
      +      "description": "The refusal code, such as no_conversation or rate_limited.",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "message": {
      +      "description": "The refusal, worded for the person.",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "ok": {
      +      "const": false,
      +      "description": "Only on a refusal, as false: error and message then say why, and nothing else is set.",
      +      "type": "boolean"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / conversation_id / description
      Added value: +"The conversation_id returned by fyreflock_start, fyreflock_next or fyreflock_status."
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the destructiveHint annotation: discloses that the conversation ends, they never meet again, the other person is not told, the action is irreversible from here (only via website), it does not file a report, and the no_conversation refusal condition.

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?

Front-loads the core action, then layers constraints, alternatives, and error behavior in short declarative sentences with no wasted wording.

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 destructive two-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers consequences, irreversibility, alternatives, and failure mode—nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning about conversation_id validity ('neither open nor recent' triggers no_conversation) and reinforces the person_asked gating condition beyond the schema text.

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 ('Block the current or a recent stranger') with clear scope, and distinguishes itself from siblings like fyreflock_leave and fyreflock_report by name.

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 says when to use it ('Only when the person asked'), when to use alternatives ('To end a conversation without blocking use fyreflock_leave', 'use fyreflock_report as well'), and the precondition for the id being open or recent.

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.