Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
dotbugi-mcp

dotbugi-mcp

by hs-shell
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

동영상 강의 STT 중지

stop_transcribe
Idempotent

Stops an active lecture transcription and cancels queued STT jobs, deleting temporary files and discarding partial results to prevent incomplete output.

Instructions

transcribe_lecture 로 실행 중인 STT 변환을 멈추고 남은 대기열도 취소한다. 임시 파일은 지우고, 덜 된 결과는 남기지 않는다.

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": "stop_transcribe"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing two side effects: remaining queue items are cancelled and temp files are deleted, with partial results discarded. This is valuable context for a mutating tool. Minor tension with destructiveHint=false since discarding partial output is a form of data loss, though it concerns ephemeral/intermediate data rather than user records.

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?

Two tightly packed sentences, front-loaded with the core action and then the side effects. Every clause carries information and nothing is padded.

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?

Complete enough for a zero-param action tool: the safety profile is in annotations and the behavioral consequences are spelled out. It doesn't say what happens if no transcription is running, a small gap, but there's no output schema needed to fill.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate and the baseline applies. The description correctly stays silent on inputs rather than inventing any.

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?

Names a specific verb+resource ('STT 변환을 멈추고') and explicitly scopes it to work started by transcribe_lecture, letting an agent distinguish it from status/install siblings without opening any 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?

The reference to 'transcribe_lecture 로 실행 중인' implies when to use it (to halt an active transcription), giving clear context. It stops short of explicit when-not conditions or pointing to a sibling such as transcribe_status for checking progress, so it's strong but not 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