Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
vm-relay

vm-relay

by WeZZard
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Release the VM

relay_release
Destructive

Abandon a guest's work by destroying and unregistering its VM when a task isn't completed, keeping evidence and allowing other guests to continue. Safe to retry.

Instructions

Abandon one guest's work: destroy the VM of the guest that guest names and unregister it, retaining whatever evidence already exists, without claiming the task succeeded; the session's other guests keep running. Use this instead of relay_finish when the task is not being completed. Safe to retry if a previous release attempt failed; a failed release keeps ownership until destruction is verified. When this session holds no guest, the result is an error saying that nothing was released; a lease acquired under another session identity is never guessed at.

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": {
      "guest": "<guest>"
    },
    "name": "relay_release"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
guestYesThe guest this call acts on: the name relay_acquire answered.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.15.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / guest
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The guest this call acts on: the name relay_acquire answered.",
+  "pattern": "^[a-z0-9][a-z0-9-]{0,47}$",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / required
      Added value: +[
+  "guest"
+]
  2. Addedv0.5.1

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declare destructive/non-idempotent, and the description adds real context: evidence is retained, success is not claimed, sibling guests keep running, a failed release keeps ownership until destruction is verified, and another session's lease is never guessed at. The 'safe to retry after failure' note is consistent with idempotentHint=false, since a retry after success errors instead of repeating silently.

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?

A single dense paragraph, front-loaded with the core action and consequence. Nearly every clause carries distinct information (scope, alternative, retry, errors), though the run-on sentence structure is heavier than necessary.

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?

For a one-param destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers the mutation's effects, evidence retention, retry semantics, and failure/error modes. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 100% and the schema already explains the guest identifier ('the name relay_acquire answered'). The description contextualizes that this name is the target of destruction, but adds no format or resolution detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 action chain (destroy the named guest's VM and unregister it) with the scope 'one guest', and explicitly differentiates itself from relay_finish. An agent can distinguish this from relay_acquire/relay_finish without opening any schema.

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?

Names the alternative ('Use this instead of relay_finish when the task is not being completed') and gives the selecting condition, plus retry guidance and the no-guest error case. When-to-use and when-not-to-use are both explicit.

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