Skip to main content
Glama

Steer Webhound Session

webhound_send_message

Send user guidance to a Webhound session to answer a checkpoint and resume, or to update the research objective, scope, or constraints.

Instructions

Send user-provided guidance to a session. Use reason="awaiting_input" to answer a checkpoint and resume. Use reason="user_guidance" only for a real user objective/scope/constraint/deliverable change. Use webhound_add_sidecar_notes for source suggestions.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
reasonYesuser_guidance interrupts/replans for a real user change. awaiting_input replies to a checkpoint and resumes. Do not use for elapsed time, impatience, partial notes, or ordinary source notes.
messageYes
session_idYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYes
urlNo
bodyNo
codeNo
costNo
dataNo
doneNo
kindNo
nameNo
noteNo
toolYes
errorNo
agentsNo
alertsNo
budgetNo
queuedNo
reasonNo
statusNo
blockedNo
datasetNo
healthyNo
messageNo
productNo
resumedNo
stoppedNo
summaryYes
acceptedNo
activityNo
free_runNo
no_spendNo
requiredNo
documentsNo
retryableNo
checked_atNo
created_atNo
is_runningNo
message_idNo
new_budgetNo
session_idNo
top_up_urlNo
api_messageNo
billing_urlNo
next_actionNo
total_spentNo
amount_addedNo
credit_limitNo
interruptingNo
next_actionsNo
output_readyNo
session_typeNo
current_spendNo
error_detailsNo
original_toolNo
action_startedNo
budget_controlNo
current_budgetNo
guidance_addedNo
schema_versionYes
current_balanceNo
mcp_next_actionNo
previous_budgetNo
resumes_sessionNo
session_startedNo
status_snapshotNo
completion_stateNo
research_harnessNo
runtime_estimateNo
sidecar_guidanceNo
agent_instructionNo
completion_reasonNo
followup_check_inNo
assembly_triggeredNo
forbidden_next_toolsNo
auto_recharge_enabledNo
successful_completionNo
user_message_templateNo
retry_after_user_confirmsNo
Behavior4/5

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

The description explains behavioral aspects like answering checkpoints and interrupting/replanning, which goes beyond the annotations. However, it could mention whether sending a message triggers any asynchronous actions or requires a follow-up.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is very concise, consisting of three short sentences that are front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (two distinct use cases), the description covers the main scenarios well. It could mention the expected behavior after sending (e.g., whether the session waits for further input), but the presence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return values.

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?

The schema covers 33% of parameters (reason has description). The description adds significant context for the 'reason' parameter by explaining the two enum values, but provides no additional info for 'message' or 'session_id'. This partially compensates for low schema coverage.

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 the tool's purpose as sending user-provided guidance to a session. It distinguishes from sibling tool webhound_add_sidecar_notes by specifying that tool is for source suggestions.

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?

The description provides explicit guidance on when to use each reason value ('awaiting_input' vs 'user_guidance'), and directs users to an alternative tool for source suggestions, clearly indicating when not to use this tool.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/WebhoundAI/webhound-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server