Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Proofpage MCP Server

Proofpage MCP Server

by Mehxeo
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

proofpage_cancel_crawl

Cancels future requests in a collection job using its job ID, stopping remaining crawl tasks before they run.

Instructions

Cancel future requests in a collection job.

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": {
      "job_id": "<job_id>"
    },
    "name": "proofpage_cancel_crawl"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
job_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.5.0

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. 'Cancel future requests' hints that already-dispatched work may still complete, which is valuable, but it does not say whether cancellation is final or reversible, what terminal state the job enters, whether a receipt/run record persists, or what permissions are needed for a destructive operation.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

One short, front-loaded sentence with no filler, so there is no waste to trim. The problem is under-specification rather than verbosity — brevity here is achieved by omitting information an agent needs.

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?

For a destructive mutation with no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented parameter, the description is far too thin. It should at minimum say that the job is stopped rather than deleted, what happens to in-flight requests, and what the caller gets back.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must explain job_id but explains nothing — not its origin (presumably from start_crawl or get_crawl), format, or whether an invalid ID errors or no-ops. The single required parameter has zero semantic anchoring.

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?

States a specific verb ('Cancel') and resource ('future requests in a collection job'), which distinguishes it from the read-oriented siblings get_crawl/step_crawl/start_crawl. The terminology drift is a minor flaw: the tool is named '*_crawl' but the description says 'collection job', leaving the agent to infer these are the same object.

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?

No guidance on when to cancel versus when to let a job finish, no preconditions, and no mention of the parallel cancel_quote_check sibling that could be confused with it. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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