Skip to main content
Glama

deactivate_agent

Disable an agent's ability to make payments in the Lightning Wallet MCP server until manually reactivated. Requires operator authorization.

Instructions

Deactivate an agent - it cannot make payments until reactivated. REQUIRES OPERATOR KEY.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
agent_idYesAgent ID to deactivate

Implementation Reference

  • The implementation of the deactivateAgent method, which makes an API request to 'update_agent' to set 'is_active' to false.
    async deactivateAgent(agentId: number): Promise<{
      agentId: number;
      message: string;
      rawResponse: ApiResponse;
    }> {
      const result = await this.request<ApiResponse & { message?: string }>('update_agent', {
        agent_id: agentId,
        updates: { is_active: false },
      });
    
      return {
        agentId,
        message: result.message || 'Agent deactivated',
        rawResponse: result,
      };
  • The tool handler for 'deactivate_agent' in the MCP server, which parses input and calls the client's deactivateAgent method.
    case 'deactivate_agent': {
      const parsed = DeactivateAgentSchema.parse(args);
      const result = await session.requireClient().deactivateAgent(parsed.agent_id);
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: 'text',
            text: JSON.stringify({
              success: true,
              message: result.message || 'Agent deactivated',
              agent_id: result.agentId,
            }, null, 2),
          },
        ],
      };
    }
  • The input validation schema for the 'deactivate_agent' tool.
    const DeactivateAgentSchema = z.object({
      agent_id: z.number().int().positive().describe('Agent ID to deactivate'),
    });
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: the tool is destructive (deactivates), requires authentication ('OPERATOR KEY'), and has a consequence (cannot make payments). However, it lacks details on permissions, reversibility, or error handling, which are important for a mutation tool.

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 front-loaded and efficient with two sentences: one stating the action and consequence, and another specifying the requirement. Every sentence adds value without waste, making it appropriately concise.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (a destructive mutation with authentication needs), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is adequate but has gaps. It covers purpose and prerequisites but lacks details on response format, error cases, or side effects, which would improve completeness.

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 the schema already documents the 'agent_id' parameter. The description does not add any meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as format constraints or examples, which aligns with the baseline score of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 clearly states the action ('deactivate') and resource ('agent'), and specifies the consequence ('it cannot make payments until reactivated'). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'delete_agent' or 'reactivate_agent', which would require a 5.

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 description provides clear context by stating 'REQUIRES OPERATOR KEY', indicating a prerequisite. It implies usage for disabling payment capabilities, but does not explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives like 'delete_agent' or 'reactivate_agent', which would be needed for a 5.

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

Install Server

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/lightningfaucet/lightning-wallet-mcp'

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