Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
kernl

kernl

by fastslack
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

kernel_plan_execute

Execute a previously validated plan, enforcing approval tokens or user prompts for non-reversible tool calls, and return per-node status, duration, and receipts.

Instructions

Run a plan that previously passed kernel_plan_validate. When the plan touches non-reversible tools, the caller MUST either pass a matching approval_token (from validate) or set prompt_user: true to drive an interactive elicitation. Returns one outcome per node with status, duration, and the per-call receipt when attestation is on.

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": {
      "plan": "<plan>"
    },
    "name": "kernel_plan_execute"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
planYes
prompt_userNo
approval_tokenNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.5.1

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the approval/elicitation requirement and the per-node outcome shape, but it does not say whether execution is idempotent, what happens to partially-completed plans on error, or what side effects the underlying tool calls have on the caller's environment.

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?

Three tightly packed sentences with the prerequisite and the approval requirement front-loaded, and no filler. The single long final sentence about return values carries a lot at once, but nothing is redundant.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Has an output schema, so return values need not be spelled out, and the approval path is well covered. However, for a nested plan-execution tool with zero schema description coverage and no annotations, the description should explain at least the node dependency/error-handling semantics and constraint enforcement to be callable with confidence.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% for a deeply nested object: node fields such as on_error, args_from, args_template, depends_on and the constraints block (max_usd, max_tokens, max_latency_ms, abort_on_first_error) are completely undocumented. The description only explains approval_token ("from validate") and prompt_user ("drive an interactive elicitation"), leaving most of the plan structure's semantics unstated.

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 verb and resource ("Run a plan") and instantly scopes it by naming the prerequisite sibling kernel_plan_validate, so the agent can distinguish execute from validate without opening either schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives a clear gating condition (the plan must have previously passed kernel_plan_validate) and an explicit either/or for non-reversible tools: matching approval_token or prompt_user: true. It does not say when NOT to execute or what to do if validation has not been run, which keeps it short of a 5.

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