Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Keelen

by io.github.jamie7893
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Archive Project

archive_project
Destructive

Archive a project (reversible shelve) — frees a project slot in-tool.

Stops any in-flight machine, then flips the project to `archived`: it drops
out of the per-tier project cap (freeing a slot for a new project) and the
loop stops dispatching it, but the project + its history are kept and can be
restored from the dashboard project page. Stopping a machine DESTROYS the
running process state — restoring the project later cannot bring that
execution back, so this is destructive despite being reversible. A replay on
an already-archived project changes no row, but is not idempotent end to end.
This is preferable to `delete_project` unless the project must be gone.
Owner-scoped (an MCP key is owner-only); a project not in the workspace 404s.

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": {
      "project_id": "<project_id>"
    },
    "name": "archive_project"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, but the description goes well beyond them: it explains that stopping a machine DESTROYS running process state, that a replay no-ops on rows yet is 'not idempotent end to end', and that restoration keeps project + history. This is exactly the beyond-annotation context that prevents misuse.

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 and the reversibility caveat before the operational consequences. Every sentence (slot freeing, process destruction, replay semantics, ownership) carries distinct load with no filler.

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 mutation with an output schema (so return values needn't be explained), the description covers what is destroyed, what is retained, restoration path, idempotency, and error behavior. Nothing an agent needs to call this safely 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 0%, so the description carries the burden; it adds that the key is owner-scoped and that a project not in the workspace returns 404. It does not describe the project_id's format or how to obtain it, leaving a small gap for a single required identifier.

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+resource ('Archive a project') and immediately frames it as a reversible shelve, distinguishing it from permanent removal. It explicitly names the sibling it is not (delete_project), so an agent can route correctly without opening either 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?

Gives an explicit when-to-use rule ('preferable to delete_project unless the project must be gone') plus the conditions under which the operation applies (owner-scoped, 404 for out-of-workspace projects). The alternative sibling is named with the condition that selects it.

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

All Keelen 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