LocalREPL MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

kill_shell

Send a signal to terminate a spawned shell process. Choose between SIGTERM (graceful), SIGKILL (force), or SIGINT (Ctrl-C).

Instructions

Send a signal to a spawned process.

    Args:
        signal_name: 'SIGTERM' (graceful, default), 'SIGKILL' (force),
            or 'SIGINT' (Ctrl-C equivalent).
        remove_from_registry: Drop from _PROCESSES after signalling.

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": {
      "proc_id": "<proc_id>"
    },
    "name": "kill_shell"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`proc_id`	Yes
`signal_name`	No	SIGTERM
`remove_from_registry`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 12, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided; description only mentions args but does not disclose side effects (e.g., process termination implications, safety). Missing behavioral context.

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?

Concise, no redundant sentences. Purpose is front-loaded. Every sentence adds value.

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?

No output schema; description fails to mention return values, async behavior, or process post-state. Incomplete for a mutation tool.

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 description coverage is 0%. Description explains signal_name and remove_from_registry but omits required proc_id, only partially compensating.

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?

Clearly states 'Send a signal to a spawned process', which is a specific verb+resource. Distinguishes from sibling tools like spawn_shell, run_shell, etc.

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 use this tool versus alternatives. Does not explain signal selection context or prerequisites.

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