Skip to main content
Glama

Join a second client to the running session

join

Brings an existing character into an active tModLoader session, waiting until that client sends a live, world-ready heartbeat.

Instructions

Bring another character into the session that is already running.

Args: player: Character name. Must already exist — -player does not create one — and must not be one this session already has, in any casing. timeout: Seconds to wait for that client to report a live, world-ready heartbeat of its own.

The protocol has supported several clients since answers became per-player; the LIFECYCLE supported one, so the arrangement that work exists to make safe could only be reached by spawning a game by hand. This is that, with the waiting done properly.

It waits for THIS client, not for a process. A new pid says something started — not that a character loaded, that the join was accepted, or that a world is under it. And it watches only that player's own tokened heartbeat: the unsuffixed <mod>-hooks.txt is a shared slot holding whichever client booted last, so accepting it would return against the heartbeat of the game that was already here.

Address the new client by name — diag(target=...), shot(target=...) — which already works, because addressing was never the half that was missing. stop takes it down with everything else the session started.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
playerYes
timeoutNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
joinedYes
playerYes
started_pidsYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.6.3

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond annotations, the description explains non-obvious behavior: it waits for THIS client's own tokened heartbeat, not a new process; it rejects the unsuffixed shared heartbeat slot because that could return against the existing game; and it notes that stop will take the joined client down with the session. This is exactly the kind of behavioral context an agent needs.

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 key information is present and front-loaded, but the middle paragraph is dense and indirect ('This is that, with the waiting done properly') and the protocol-history framing adds cognitive load. It could be tighter without losing the important heartbeat caveats.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a two-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers preconditions, timeout semantics, heartbeat subtleties, how to address the joined client via diag/shot, and teardown via stop. Nothing critical appears missing for correct invocation.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description fully compensates. It explains player is a pre-existing character name, that -player does not create one, and that the name must not already belong to the session in any casing. It defines timeout as seconds to wait for a live, world-ready heartbeat. This is strong semantic value beyond the bare field names.

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?

Description opens with a specific action and target: 'Bring another character into the session that is already running.' It clearly differentiates from siblings such as launch and stop by emphasizing 'second client' and 'already running.' No ambiguity about what operation this performs.

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 intended use is clear: use when an additional client must join an existing running session. It gives context about why this is needed and what must already be true. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, so it misses the top tier.

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