aziel-runtime

Drop QNM rollup presence

mesh_leave

DestructiveIdempotent

Remove a previously joined node from the rollup counts by specifying its node_id; requires confirm=true to execute or dry_run=true for a preview, and only affects that node's presence.

Instructions

Drop one node from the QNM rollup (POST /v1/mesh/leave) — not a suite-wide radio off. Use this when a previously joined node should leave the counts. Do not use it for turning suite-presence off or listing nodes; use mesh_nodes or mesh_status instead. Destructive to that node's presence only. Always allowed. No implicit heal. Repeating a missing node_id is a no-op/refuse, not resurrection. node_id is required. Mutation requires confirm=true (runtime gate) or dry_run=true (preview only, no write). confirm and dry_run stay optional on inputSchema.required. Returns leave receipt for the node_id.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`confirm`	No	Documented confirmation flag. Optional in inputSchema.required (connector refresh must not break). tools/call still refuses MCP-CONFIRM-REQUIRED when confirm is missing or false unless dry_run=true (preview, no write).
`dry_run`	No	Optional preview flag. When true, return a would-mutate preview and do not write. Alternative to confirm=true. Does not mutate.
`node_id`	Yes	Required node id to drop from the rollup.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`code`	No	FragGate or fabric code when present: FG-OK, FG-HALLUC-TOOL, FG-STUB, FG-LOCAL-ONLY, FG-UNKNOWN-OP, FG-GATE-REFUSE, FG-LAMB-REFUSE, or a module refuse such as MESH-* / AKM-*.
`door`	No	Door name. The public door is fraggate.
`ran_in`	No	Execution locale (for example aziel-runtime) when present.
`result`	No	FragGate body: ok, code, door, slug, op, engine_digest, ran_in, provenance, refusal, limitations, receipt, plus the engine result. Unknown names refuse FG-HALLUC-TOOL; stubs refuse FG-STUB.
`status`	No	HTTP-like status when present on wrappers (200 ok; 400+ error / refuse).
`display`	No	Human-facing envelope. Show title and summary, then take the next input.
`receipt`	No	Optional receipt, ledger tip, or TemporalLock/ForgeReceipts exit when the door stamped one.
`refusal`	No	Explicit refuse object, code, or message when the door or engine refused.
`engine_op`	No	Resolved engine op when present (often inside result).
`ledger_tip`	No	Ask/refuse ledger tip when the door stamped one.
`provenance`	No	Provenance / input packet when the pipeline attached one.
`session_id`	No	Raw session id when session plumbing was used. Hidden unless the user asked for the chain.
`engine_slug`	No	Resolved engine slug when present (often inside result).
`limitations`	No	Capability limitations or Remain-OFF notes when present.
`engine_digest`	No	64-hex engine_digest when a true in-process engine ran (often inside result).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedv2.0.2Sep 18, 2026

changedInput schema / description

Previous value: -"node_id is required. Missing node_id refuses MESH-BAD-INPUT."New value: +"node_id is required. Missing node_id refuses MESH-BAD-INPUT. Mutation requires confirm=true or dry_run=true."

addedInput schema / properties / confirm

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Documented confirmation flag. Optional in inputSchema.required (connector refresh must not break). tools/call still refuses MCP-CONFIRM-REQUIRED when confirm is missing or false unless dry_run=true (preview, no write).",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / dry_run

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional preview flag. When true, return a would-mutate preview and do not write. Alternative to confirm=true. Does not mutate.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

Addedv1.6.2Sep 12, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses behaviors beyond annotations: 'Destructive to that node's presence only', 'No implicit heal', 'Repeating a missing node_id is a no-op/refuse', and the confirm/dry_run runtime gate. These add practical context that annotations (destructiveHint, idempotentHint) do not fully convey. No contradiction with annotations.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is dense but well-structured, starting with purpose, then usage, then behavioral details, parameter gates, and return. Each sentence earns its place, though it is slightly long. It is appropriately sized for a mutating tool with gates.

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?

It covers purpose, usage exclusions, edge cases (missing node_id), confirmation requirements, dry_run preview, and return receipt. With an output schema present, it need not detail return structure. This is complete for safe and correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

While schema coverage is 100%, the description adds essential semantics: it clarifies that node_id is required, explains the runtime gate requiring confirm=true or dry_run=true, and notes that confirm and dry_run remain optional in the schema despite being required for mutation. This is critical for correct invocation and goes beyond schema descriptions.

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 clearly states 'Drop one node from the QNM rollup' with a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes it from 'a suite-wide radio off'. It also names alternatives (mesh_nodes, mesh_status) so the agent can differentiate it from sibling tools.

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?

Explicit guidance: 'Use this when a previously joined node should leave the counts' and 'Do not use it for turning suite-presence off or listing nodes; use mesh_nodes or mesh_status instead.' This provides direct when-to-use and when-not-to-use conditions with named alternatives.

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