Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
KrakenMCP

KrakenMCP

by gateniomer
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

session

Summarize a run group’s status: surface items needing attention, recent runs and chains, and per-agent/model outcome, token, cost, duration, and tool-call totals.

Instructions

A session at a glance: what needs attention (running, waiting, ready to merge), recent runs and chains, and totals per tentacle/agent/model (outcomes, tokens, cost, duration, tool calls).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "session"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sessionNoRun group labeldefault

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.1.3

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the returned data categories (attention states, recent runs/chains, totals per tentacle/agent/model) and metrics, but it does not state read-only/side-effect behavior, permissions, pagination, or how the default session is resolved.

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?

It is one front-loaded sentence with a compact parenthetical inventory. Every phrase identifies a returned category or metric, and there is no boilerplate or redundant wording.

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?

For a one-parameter overview tool with no output schema, the description covers the main return categories and metrics. It still leaves the relationship to sibling status/chain tools and the exact response shape implicit, so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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% for the single optional session parameter ('Run group label', default 'default'). The description adds no meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 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?

The description identifies the resource (session) and scope (an at-a-glance overview), then enumerates the categories returned: attention states, recent runs and chains, and totals per tentacle/agent/model. It is specific enough to distinguish a summary view from action siblings like run or cancel, but it does not use a clear imperative verb or name a sibling alternative.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

'At a glance' and 'what needs attention' imply a triage/overview use case, but the description never explicitly states when to use this tool instead of status, chain, or run. No exclusions, prerequisites, or alternatives are given.

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