Skip to main content
Glama
michaelneale

Goose App Maker MCP

by michaelneale

app_stop_server

Stop the currently running HTTP server to halt web application serving and free system resources.

Instructions

Stop the currently running HTTP server.

Returns:
    A dictionary containing the result of the operation

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • main.py:480-512 (handler)
    The handler function for the app_stop_server tool. It stops the HTTP server serving the app, resets response state, and returns success or error status. Registered via @mcp.tool() decorator.
    @mcp.tool()
    def app_stop_server() -> Dict[str, Any]:
        """
        Stop the currently running HTTP server.
        
        Returns:
            A dictionary containing the result of the operation
        """
        global http_server, app_response, response_ready
        
        try:
            if http_server:
                logger.info("Stopping HTTP server")
                http_server.shutdown()
                http_server.server_close()
                http_server = None
                
                # Reset response state
                app_response = None
                response_ready = False
                
                return {
                    "success": True,
                    "message": "HTTP server stopped successfully"
                }
            else:
                return {
                    "success": False,
                    "error": "No HTTP server is currently running"
                }
        except Exception as e:
            logger.error(f"Error stopping server: {e}")
            return {"success": False, "error": f"Failed to stop server: {str(e)}"}
  • main.py:480-480 (registration)
    The @mcp.tool() decorator registers the app_stop_server function as an MCP tool.
    @mcp.tool()
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 burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool stops a server, implying a destructive mutation, but doesn't clarify permissions needed, whether the action is reversible, side effects (e.g., interrupting active connections), or error handling. The mention of a return dictionary adds minimal value without details on its structure.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is brief (two sentences) and front-loaded with the core action, but the second sentence about returns is vague and adds little value without specifics. It could be more structured by integrating return details more meaningfully or omitted if covered by an output schema.

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 operation with no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. It states what the tool does but lacks critical behavioral context. The presence of an output schema mitigates the need to explain return values, but gaps remain in usage guidelines and transparency for a mutation tool.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters, focusing on the tool's action. A baseline of 4 is applied since it avoids unnecessary repetition of schema information.

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 ('Stop') and target ('currently running HTTP server'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from its siblings like 'app_delete' or 'app_error', which might also affect server state, so it doesn't reach the highest score.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., a server must be running), exclusions, or how it relates to sibling tools like 'app_serve' (which likely starts a server). This leaves the agent with minimal context for decision-making.

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/michaelneale/goose-app-maker-mcp'

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