behavior-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

set_parameters

Dynamically set, inspect, or reset execution parameters for the active behavior runtime. Tune tree-level variables and thresholds instead of sharing cross-node data.

Instructions

Dynamically set, inspect, or reset execution parameters for the active behavior runtime (actions: set, get, reset). Use set_parameters instead of manage_blackboard for tuning tree-level execution variables and thresholds rather than sharing cross-node data keys.

Returns updated parameter map and execution ID.

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": {
      "action": "<action>"
    },
    "name": "set_parameters"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`action`	Yes	Parameter operation: set, get, reset
`project`	No	Target project slug
`parameters`	No	Key-value parameters map to apply
`execution_id`	No	Target execution instance ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.3.1Oct 1, 2026
- changedInput schema / properties / action / description
```
Previous value: -"Parameter operation"New value: +"Parameter operation: set, get, reset"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / action / enum
```
Added value: +[
+  "set",
+  "get",
+  "reset"
+]
```
Changed9 schema fields changedv0.2.1Sep 24, 2026
- 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: +"Parameter operation"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / action / enum
```
Removed value: -[
-  "set",
-  "get",
-  "reset"
-]
```
- addedInput schema / properties / execution_id / description
```
Added value: +"Target execution instance ID"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / parameters / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -true
```
- addedInput schema / properties / parameters / description
```
Added value: +"Key-value parameters map to apply"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / parameters / properties
```
Removed value: -{}
```
- addedInput schema / properties / project / description
```
Added value: +"Target project slug"
```
First observedv0.1.2Sep 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and idempotentHint=false; the description adds the reset capability and the return payload (updated parameter map + execution ID), which is useful behavioral context. It does not flag that reset is non-idempotent/potentially lossy, keeping it short of a 5, but it exceeds the annotation baseline.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core verb+resource and the action list, followed by the sibling routing and return note. Density is high and little is wasted, though the parenthetical action list slightly duplicates the enum.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully states the return value (parameter map + execution ID), and it covers the actions and the sibling distinction. Enough for an agent to invoke correctly, missing only finer detail on reset semantics and project/execution_id targeting.

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%, so the schema already documents action, project, parameters and execution_id, making the baseline 3. The description restates the three action values and implies the parameters map but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema.

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?

States specific verbs (set, inspect, reset) and a precise resource (execution parameters for the active behavior runtime), and it explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling manage_blackboard by domain (tree-level execution variables vs cross-node data keys). An agent can differentiate this from its siblings without opening a 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?

It names the alternative (manage_blackboard) and the condition that selects this tool over it: tuning execution variables/thresholds rather than sharing cross-node keys. It lacks guidance on when to choose set vs get vs reset beyond the enum, so it's clear context but not a full when/when-not treatment.

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

Deploy Server