Skip to main content
Glama

cancel eval

cancel_eval

Stop a pending or running eval run before more generation or judge calls are billed. Cancel misconfigured or unneeded runs; completed runs are left unchanged.

Instructions

Stop a PENDING or RUNNING eval run so no further generations or judge calls are billed — use it when a run was misconfigured or is no longer needed. POST /v1/evals/{id}/cancel (API-key scope: evals:write). Returns: 200 with the run object (same shape as GET /v1/evals/{id}) with status "CANCELLED" and error set to "Cancelled by <email of the key's minting user>"; progress_ratio reflects work completed so far. Notes: Requires OWNER/ADMIN minting user (403) — same gate as create, because it controls wallet spend. A run already DONE|ERROR|CANCELLED is refused 400 ("This run is already done — only a pending or running eval can be cancelled."); a terminal result is never overwritten. 404 if not in this workspace. Cancelled runs are inert: no future tick claims them, so nothing more is billed; a slice already in flight finishes its bounded batch (already-paid work), and in the rare race where that was the last slice the run may still land DONE with real results. No request body is read.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe eval run id.
Install Server

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description goes well beyond the annotations, disclosing auth requirements (OWNER/ADMIN minting user, 403), terminal-state refusal (400), workspace scoping (404), billing implications, race behavior for in-flight slices, and the exact response shape and error message. This is exceptionally transparent.

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?

Though lengthy, every sentence conveys a distinct operational fact: conditions, auth, refusal behavior, error codes, race semantics, and response contents. The most important purpose is front-loaded, and the detail is justified by the tool's subtle billing and terminal-state behavior.

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?

The description is complete for a mutation tool with no output schema and one parameter. It covers prerequisites, failure modes, response shape, side effects on billing, and edge cases. An agent has everything needed to call this tool correctly and predict the outcome.

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 coverage is 100% for the single required id parameter, so the schema already documents it fully. The description references the id in the endpoint path but adds no meaningful parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, matching the baseline for high schema coverage.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Stop a PENDING or RUNNING eval run.' It also states the motivating purpose (misconfigured or no longer needed) and clarifies the billing rationale, making the tool's role clear and distinct from siblings like delete_eval or cancel_batch.

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?

Explicitly says when to use the tool ('when a run was misconfigured or is no longer needed') and clearly lists when not to use it: a run already DONE, ERROR, or CANCELLED is refused. It does not name alternative sibling tools, but the when/when-not guidance is strong enough to route an agent correctly.

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

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/omnia-v/errorbar-mcp'

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