MCP Agent Mail

renew_file_reservations

Extend active file reservations for a coding agent without reissuing them, preventing lease expiry during collaborative work. Specify project, agent, and optional paths or reservation IDs.

Instructions

Extend expiry for active file reservations held by an agent without reissuing them.

Parameters

project_key : str Project slug or human key. agent_name : str Agent identity who owns the reservations. extend_seconds : int Seconds to extend from the later of now or current expiry (min 60s). paths : Optional[list[str]] Restrict renewals to matching path patterns. file_reservation_ids : Optional[list[int]] Restrict renewals to matching reservation ids.

Returns

dict { renewed: int, file_reservations: [{id, path_pattern, old_expires_ts, new_expires_ts}] }

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`paths`	No
`format`	No
`agent_name`	Yes
`project_key`	Yes
`extend_seconds`	No
`registration_token`	No
`file_reservation_ids`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.4Sep 30, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it does disclose useful traits: extension is measured from the later of now or current expiry, and there is a 60s minimum. It omits what happens with expired or non-held reservations, permission/auth requirements, and the fact that a registration_token option exists at all.

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 one-line purpose statement is front-loaded and the structured Parameters/Returns sections are justified given zero schema-level docs. The Returns block is slightly redundant since an output schema exists, but overall there is little waste.

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

Completeness4/5

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

An output schema exists, so return values need not have been restated, and the description still frames the renewal semantics adequately for a stateful mutation. The undocumented 'registration_token' and 'format' parameters and undefined behavior for already-expired reservations are the only real omissions.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it documents 5 of 7 parameters with real semantics (project slug, owning agent, extension origin with 60s minimum, path and id filters). It leaves 'format' and 'registration_token' completely unexplained, which is the remaining gap.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The opening sentence states a specific verb (extend) and resource (expiry of active file reservations) and adds a qualifier ('without reissuing them') that separates it from file_reservation_paths. However, it never names a sibling tool, so the differentiation from release_file_reservations and force_release_file_reservation is left implicit.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description never says when to renew versus release and re-acquire, nor does it note prerequisites or exclusions. 'Extend expiry ... without reissuing' implies a use case but gives no explicit routing guidance against the several sibling reservation tools.

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