zandronum-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Kill a Zandronum instance

kill_instance

Stop a running Zandronum instance by requesting a graceful engine shutdown first, then force-kill if it does not exit, avoiding GPU teardown errors.

Instructions

Stop a launched instance and detach from it. Asks the engine to quit itself first (a hard kill mid-render can wedge macOS GPU teardown and leave an unkillable process), then force-kills if it doesn't exit.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "kill_instance"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`instance`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jun 26, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It discloses the two-step process (soft then force kill) and explains the macOS GPU teardown issue. Could mention reentrancy safety, but overall 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?

Two sentences with no fluff: first states the purpose, second explains the method and rationale. Ideal front-loading and brevity.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the behavioral process well. Missing parameter documentation reduces completeness slightly.

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

Parameters2/5

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

The description does not mention the 'instance' parameter despite 0% schema coverage. The parameter's meaning and default (1) are only inferable from the name. This is a significant 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 the tool stops a launched instance and detaches from it, using a two-step process. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like load_map or set_pause.

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?

The description implies usage for terminating instances but does not explicitly say when to use it or mention alternatives. It provides context about the graceful exit rationale but lacks explicit guidance.

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