Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Aureon MCP

Aureon MCP

Official
by buildaureon
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

aureon_pause_objective

Pause continuous evaluation for a specific objective by ID, optionally recording a reason on the decision record. Use when monitoring or execution must stop temporarily.

Instructions

Pause continuous evaluation for an objective

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": {
      "objectiveId": "<objectiveId>"
    },
    "name": "aureon_pause_objective"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
reasonNoOptional note stored on the decision record
objectiveIdYesObjective ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.16

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not say whether pausing is reversible, what happens to in-flight evaluations, whether the decision is recorded (the 'reason' param hints at a decision record), or what authorization is required for this mutation.

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 front-loaded sentence with zero waste, though it is terse to the point of under-specification rather than optimally concise.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too thin. It omits reversibility, side effects, and the fact that a decision record is created, leaving the agent without enough context to invoke it confidently.

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 100%, so both parameters (objectiveId, reason) are already documented in the schema. The description adds no further parameter meaning; baseline 3 applies.

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 (pause) and resource (continuous evaluation for an objective), which clearly separates it from aureon_resume_objective by antonym. It doesn't explicitly name the sibling or clarify what 'continuous evaluation' encompasses, but the core action is unambiguous.

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 when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or prerequisite information. The pairing with aureon_resume_objective is inferable only from the tool name, not stated in the description.

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