Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
agent-pool-mcp

agent-pool-mcp

by rnd-pro
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

release_slot

Release a capacity slot from the cross-process ledger by admission ID. Idempotent: returns released:false with ok:true for unknown or already-released IDs.

Instructions

Release a capacity slot in the cross-process slot ledger for a given admission_id. Best-effort and idempotent: an unknown or already-released admission returns released:false with ok:true. The board calls this when a workflow step closes so the slot frees immediately instead of waiting for the dead-pid sweep.

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": {
      "admission_id": "<admission_id>"
    },
    "name": "release_slot"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
admission_idYesThe board-minted admission id whose ledger slot should be released.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.7.3

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Without annotations, the description discloses idempotency, best-effort semantics, and response for unknown/already-released admissions. Could provide more on permissions or side effects but is sufficient.

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?

Three sentences pack essential information: purpose, idempotency behavior, and usage context. No wasted words.

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?

Given no output schema, the description mentions return shape ('released:false with ok:true') and explains the tool's raison d'être. Single parameter is well described.

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% and the description adds minimal value beyond the schema's parameter description. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 capacity slot in the cross-process slot ledger for a given admission_id', specifying the exact verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings as no other tool handles slot release.

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?

Describes idempotent and best-effort nature, and when the board calls it ('when a workflow step closes'). However, lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool references.

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