Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
agentbus

agentbus

by onicarps
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

agentbus_lock_release

Release a held lease for a resource using lease and owner IDs. Works idempotently, so calling after expiry has no effect.

Instructions

Release a held lease (idempotent if already expired).

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": {
      "resource": "<resource>",
      "lease_id": "<lease_id>",
      "owner_id": "<owner_id>"
    },
    "name": "agentbus_lock_release"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
lease_idYes
owner_idYes
resourceYes
auth_tokenNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.17.0
  2. Removedv0.16.3
  3. Addedv0.2.0

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The description mentions idempotency if the lease is already expired, which is a useful behavioral trait. However, with no annotations, the description carries the full burden and fails to disclose authentication requirements, side effects, or what happens if the lease is not held.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is a single, concise sentence with no wasted words. It could arguably add more detail without becoming verbose, but it is efficiently structured.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the tool has four parameters and no parameter descriptions in the schema, the description should compensate but does not. The existence of an output schema mitigates the need to explain return values, but overall completeness is lacking.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The input schema has 0% description coverage for parameters, and the tool description does not explain any of the four parameters (lease_id, owner_id, resource, auth_token). This is a critical gap.

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 clearly states 'Release a held lease', with a specific verb and resource. The sibling tools include acquire and renew, so the purpose is distinct and 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?

Usage is implied by the name and description, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like agentbus_lock_acquire or agentbus_lock_renew. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools