Skip to main content
Glama

Stop a session

stop_session
DestructiveIdempotent

Terminate a running session's process only after confirming with the user; the session stays listed with its final screen until removed.

Instructions

End a session's process. Ask the person first. The session stays listed, with its final screen, until it is removed in Agent Guild.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "session_id": "<session_id>"
    },
    "name": "stop_session"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
session_idYesThe session id from list_sessions.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely non-redundant behavior: the human-confirmation requirement and the post-state fact that the session remains listed with its final screen until separately removed in Agent Guild. It does not say what an already-dead session does, though idempotentHint implies that is safe.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action, then the confirmation requirement, then the post-state. Nothing is padded or repeated, and each sentence carries distinct information.

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 destructive tool with full annotation coverage, the description supplies the two things structured fields cannot: the human-confirmation rule and the resulting state of the session. Only minor edge case behavior (stopping an already-ended session) is left implicit.

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?

There is a single parameter at 100% schema coverage, and the schema already explains that the id comes from list_sessions. The description adds no format, validation, or failure-mode detail for session_id, so the schema does all the work and 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?

"End a session's process" states a specific verb plus resource, and the contrast with the sibling start_session is obvious from the wording. It stops short of explicitly naming the boundary case (e.g., that this is not the same as removing a session), but the scope is unambiguous.

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?

"Ask the person first" gives a precondition for invocation, which is useful guidance. However, it never states when this tool should be chosen over simply leaving the session running, nor does it name or describe the alternative path (removal in Agent Guild) as a distinct action the agent might take instead.

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