Skip to main content
Glama
putervision

behavior-mcp

by putervision
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

abort_behavior

Halt, pause, resume, or unstick behavior execution and disengage active inputs manually. Use for immediate control instead of automatic condition interrupts.

Instructions

Immediately halt, pause, resume, or unstick behavior execution and disengage active inputs (actions: abort, pause, resume, unstick). Use abort_behavior instead of register_trigger when manually halting or recovering execution rather than configuring automatic condition interrupts.

Returns transition status, disengaged inputs, and unstick diagnostics.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actionYesExecution control operation: abort, pause, resume, unstick (resets stuck score and disengages inputs)
reasonNoReason for abort or pause
projectNoTarget project slug
trace_idNoDistributed trace ID
execution_idNoTarget execution ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.3.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / action / enum
      Added value: +[
+  "abort",
+  "pause",
+  "resume",
+  "unstick"
+]
  2. Changed8 schema fields changedv0.2.1
    • removedInput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / properties / action / description
      Added value: +"Execution control operation: abort, pause, resume, unstick (resets stuck score and disengages inputs)"
    • removedInput schema / properties / action / enum
      Removed value: -[
-  "abort",
-  "pause",
-  "resume"
-]
    • addedInput schema / properties / execution_id / description
      Added value: +"Target execution ID"
    • addedInput schema / properties / project / description
      Added value: +"Target project slug"
    • addedInput schema / properties / reason / description
      Added value: +"Reason for abort or pause"
    • addedInput schema / properties / trace_id / description
      Added value: +"Distributed trace ID"
  3. First observedv0.1.2

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare non-readOnly, non-idempotent, non-destructive, so safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral value beyond them: it discloses the side effect of disengaging active inputs and enumerates what comes back (transition status, disengaged inputs, unstick diagnostics). It does not mention authorization requirements or whether abort is recoverable.

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?

Front-loaded with the operations and kept to three tight sentences. The action set is repeated in the parenthetical after already being named, which is mild redundancy, but nothing else is wasted.

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 5-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, the sibling alternative, and the return payload, which is enough to invoke it correctly. It omits prerequisites (need for an existing execution/trace context) and the relationship between the four actions, leaving minor gaps.

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 description coverage is 100% and the action enum is already documented with per-value semantics, so the schema carries the load. The description only restates the action list and adds no format or interaction detail for reason/project/trace_id/execution_id, making the baseline 3 correct.

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?

Names the concrete operations (abort, pause, resume, unstick) against a specific resource (behavior execution) and states the side effect (disengaging active inputs). It also names the sibling it is not (register_trigger), so an agent can distinguish it without opening either schema.

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 routes the agent: 'Use abort_behavior instead of register_trigger when manually halting or recovering execution rather than configuring automatic condition interrupts.' That gives a clear alternative plus the selecting condition. It stops short of 5 because it offers no guidance on choosing among the four actions (abort vs pause vs unstick vs resume) at this level.

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