Skip to main content
Glama

Consult Kimi in background (paid)

kimi_consult_async

Start a read-only Kimi second-opinion consult in the background and get a job ID immediately; this avoids sync deadline timeouts on extensive repo-grounded reviews.

Instructions

Ask Kimi for a read-only second opinion in the background; get a job_id back immediately instead of blocking.

PAID — this spends Kimi quota on every new call; there is no dry-run preview for a consult, so run kimi_status (free) first to confirm the CLI is installed and authenticated.

Same read-only behavior as kimi_consult (Kimi never edits files), but detached — prefer it for a high-reasoning_effort or broad repo-grounded consult that can exceed the synchronous deadline (built-in default 300s), since a sync run whose deadline expires loses its partial work; this job's own deadline is separately configured (built-in default 1800s). Starting a job commits to spend (it runs to completion or its wall-clock deadline even if you never poll). Poll kimi_job_status; read/consume the consult envelope with kimi_job_result/kimi_job_consume_result; stop with kimi_job_cancel.

Data egress: same as kimi_consult — sends your question and extra_context (raw, unredacted) to your configured provider via the kimi CLI, plus files Kimi reads from its resolved working directory (workspace_root, else the server cwd — MCP roots are unavailable). Kimi auto-loads the resolved workspace's AGENTS.md and discovers skills from its own config (including extra_skill_dirs, which may point outside the workspace).

Your inputs are sent raw and unredacted. Secret redaction is best-effort and covers the gathered diff and Kimi's returned output — not what you type, and not the files Kimi reads for itself.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
modelNoOverride the Kimi model slug for this call; defaults to the server/Kimi default when unset.
questionYesThe question or prompt to send Kimi (a different model) for a read-only answer. Must be non-blank: empty or whitespace-only is rejected before any model call.
isolationNoWhich skills Kimi loads: 'inherit' (own user/project discovery) or 'ignore-skills' (empty dir). Built-ins load either way; this reduces loading, not isolation. Default: server-configured, per kimi_status. More: kimi://params.
extra_contextNoOptional author intent/background context, added as clearly-labeled UNTRUSTED prompt data. Redaction does NOT cover it — no live secrets. Full caveats and bounds: kimi://params.
workspace_rootNoAbsolute path to the target repo root — pass it to target the intended repo (MCP roots are unavailable); otherwise the call falls back to the server's own cwd and sets meta.workspace_warning.
idempotency_keyNoOptional dedup key scoped to THIS tool + workspace. Same key + same args replays the prior result with no new spend; different args are refused (idempotency_conflict). Sync and _async are separate tools and never share a key. Omit for none; retention is bounded. Lifecycle: kimi://params.
reasoning_effortNoOverride the Kimi reasoning effort for this call (a model_reasoning_effort override); omit or pass null for the server default (MOONBRIDGE_REASONING_EFFORT) or Kimi's own resolution. An open, per-model string the backend validates at run time — commonly minimal|low|medium|high|xhigh; kimi_models lists each model's advertised set (advisory). Rejection and bounds detail: kimi://params.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYes
Install Server

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only provide coarse flags (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false), but the description reveals substantial behavioral context: it is paid and spends quota on every call, has no dry-run, commits to spend once started, has a separate 1800s default deadline, sends raw and unredacted inputs, auto-loads AGENTS.md, and has best-effort secret redaction. The phrase 'read-only' refers to Kimi not editing files, so it does not contradict readOnlyHint=false; the tool still has job and quota side effects.

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 long but appropriately so given the tool's side effects, cost, and lifecycle. It is front-loaded: purpose, paid warning, and sync-vs-async tradeoff appear first, followed by job lifecycle and data egress. Each paragraph adds necessary information and none is filler.

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?

The description covers purpose, cost, deadline behavior, lifecycle tools, data egress, workspace resolution, redaction limits, and parameter caveats. Since an output schema exists, return-value details are not needed in prose. An agent has everything needed to decide whether to call this tool and how to handle the resulting job.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters and the baseline is 3. The description adds valuable operational semantics beyond the schema, especially for question and extra_context (sent raw and unredacted) and workspace_root (fallback to server cwd when MCP roots are unavailable). This extra context justifies a 4.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Ask Kimi for a read-only second opinion in the background; get a job_id back immediately instead of blocking.' It also explicitly differentiates from kimi_consult by noting the same read-only behavior but detached execution. This makes the tool's purpose and distinction from siblings immediately clear.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance: prefer this async variant for high-reasoning_effort or broad repo-grounded consults that may exceed the 300s synchronous deadline. It also prescribes the surrounding workflow: run kimi_status first, poll kimi_job_status, consume via kimi_job_result, and cancel with kimi_job_cancel. This is strong routing and lifecycle guidance.

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

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/briandconnelly/moonbridge'

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