Skip to main content
Glama
Cloto-dev

CPersona

Official
by Cloto-dev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

resume_persistence

Idempotent

Re-enable persistence immediately by clearing the caller's active no-persist TTL; scope it with session_key or affect the shared keyless bucket.

Instructions

Re-enable persistence immediately, clearing this caller's active no-persist TTL. Returns was_active=true if THIS bucket was paused before the call. It clears only the bucket session_key selects (response scope): with a session_key, your own pause and no other session's; without one, the shared keyless bucket, which on a streamable-HTTP deployment re-enables writes for every other keyless session too.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
session_keyNoOpaque session identity you declare: a partition hint, not authentication and not a data filter. Selects which no-persist pause applies to this call. Omit to share one bucket with every caller that omits it. Full text on recall.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.6.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / session_key / maxLength
      Added value: +256
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv2.5.10
    • addedInput schema / properties / session_key
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "",
+  "description": "Opaque session identity you declare: a partition hint, not authentication and not a data filter. Selects which no-persist pause applies to this call. Omit to share one bucket with every caller that omits it. Full text on recall.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. Addedv2.5.2
  4. Removedv2.5.1
  5. Addedv2.4.34

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations cover idempotency (idempotentHint=true) and non-destructiveness, and the description goes well beyond them: it discloses the return value (was_active), the response `scope` field, and critically warns that omitting session_key on a streamable-HTTP deployment re-enables writes for every other keyless session. That shared-side-effect warning is exactly the kind of behavioral context annotations cannot carry.

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 action is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by return semantics and then scope caveats. It is dense but every sentence earns its place; the bolded scope clause is long but carries the highest-stakes information, so it is justified rather than padding.

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?

With no output schema, the description must carry return-value meaning, and it does (was_active, response `scope`). Combined with the side-effect disclosure, an agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly and understand the consequences of the session_key choice.

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 the baseline is 3, but the description adds real semantic value beyond the schema: it explains that session_key selects which pause bucket is cleared, that with a key only your own pause is affected, and that omitting it targets a shared keyless bucket. This meaningfully clarifies the parameter's blast radius.

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 ('Re-enable persistence immediately, clearing this caller's active no-persist TTL'), which precisely names the action and its mechanism. It is unambiguously the inverse of the sibling pause_persistence, so an agent can select it 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 Guidelines4/5

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

The description gives clear usage context: re-enable persistence, and the scope of what gets re-enabled depending on session_key. However, it never explicitly names pause_persistence as the counterpart or states conditions for choosing between them, so routing relies on inference from the obvious inverse relationship.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools