memory-manager-mcp

Finish session

finish_session

Close an active session by recording its final status (completed, interrupted, or abandoned) and a brief summary of what transpired.

Instructions

Mark a session as finished. Statuses: completed, interrupted, abandoned. Include a short summary of what happened.

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": {
      "sessionId": "<sessionId>"
    },
    "name": "finish_session"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`status`	No	Final session status. Defaults to "completed".
`summary`	No
`sessionId`	Yes
`workspacePath`	No	Workspace directory of the project. Defaults to the server working directory.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.5.0Aug 17, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the core action and statuses but omits side effects, reversibility, or what happens to the session after finishing. The description adds little beyond the schema.

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?

The description is one sentence with no filler. The essential information (action, statuses, summary requirement) is front-loaded and concise.

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

Completeness2/5

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

This is a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema. The description is under-specified: it doesn't clarify when to use finish_session versus save_session_digest, whether finishing affects the current task, or what state the session enters. These gaps could mislead an agent.

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 50%, and the description adds the requirement for a 'short summary' and restates the status enum. It does not clarify the distinction between interrupted and abandoned, nor explain sessionId or workspacePath beyond 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 states a specific action ('Mark a session as finished') on a clear resource (session), and enumerates valid statuses. This differentiates it from sibling tools like start_session and save_session_digest.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied: finish a session with a status and summary. However, there are no explicit when-to-use instructions, alternatives, or exclusions. The statuses provide some context but don't fully clarify when each status should be chosen.

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

Deploy Server