Skip to main content
Glama
simplypixi

BugBug MCP Server

by simplypixi

stop_suite_run

Stop an active BugBug test suite execution by providing the run ID to halt ongoing automated testing processes.

Instructions

Stop a running BugBug suite run

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
runIdYesSuite run UUID to stop

Implementation Reference

  • The complete tool definition for 'stop_suite_run', including handler logic that invokes the BugBug API to stop the suite run and formats the response as MCP content.
    export const stopSuiteRunTool: Tool = {
      name: 'stop_suite_run',
      title: 'Stop a running BugBug suite run',
      description: 'Stop a running BugBug suite run',
      inputSchema: z.object({
        runId: z.string().describe('Suite run UUID to stop'),
      }).shape,
      handler: async ({ runId }) => {
          try {
    
            const response = await bugbugClient.stopSuiteRun(runId);
            
            if (response.status !== 200) {
              return {
                content: [
                  {
                    type: 'text',
                    text: `Error: ${response.status} ${response.statusText}`,
                  },
                ],
              };
            }
    
            const status = response.data;
            
            return {
              content: [
                {
                  type: 'text',
                  text: `**Suite Run Stopped:**\n\n- **ID:** ${status.id}\n- **Status:** ${status.status}\n- **Last Modified:** ${status.modified}\n- **Web App URL:** ${status.webappUrl}`,
                },
              ],
            };
          } catch (error) {
            return {
              content: [
                {
                  type: 'text',
                  text: `Error stopping suite run: ${error instanceof Error ? error.message : 'Unknown error'}`,
                },
              ],
            };
          }
        }
    };
  • Registration of all tools, including stop_suite_run from suiteRunsTools, using server.registerTool with the tool's name, schema, and handler.
    export function registerAllTools(server: McpServer): void {
      const tools: Record<string, Tool> = {
        ...configTools,
        ...testsTools,
        ...testRunsTools,
        ...suitesTools,
        ...suiteRunsTools,
        ...profilesTools,
        ...advancedTools,
      };
    
      for (const t in tools) {
        server.registerTool(
          tools[t].name,
          {
            description: tools[t].description,
            inputSchema: tools[t].inputSchema,
            annotations: { title: tools[t].title },
          },
          (args: unknown) => tools[t].handler(args as unknown)
        );
      }
    }
  • Zod input schema for the stop_suite_run tool, validating the runId parameter.
    inputSchema: z.object({
      runId: z.string().describe('Suite run UUID to stop'),
    }).shape,
  • BugBug API client helper method that performs the HTTP POST request to stop the suite run.
    async stopSuiteRun(id: string): Promise<ApiResponse<BugBugSuiteRun>> {
      return this.makeRequest(`/suiteruns/${id}/stop/`, 'POST');
    }
Behavior3/5

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

The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond what annotations provide. Annotations give the title 'Stop a running BugBug suite run' which already indicates this is a destructive/mutative operation. The description doesn't elaborate on what 'stop' entails (e.g., whether it terminates immediately or gracefully, what happens to partial results, or any side effects). However, it doesn't contradict the annotations either.

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?

The description is perfectly concise - a single sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any unnecessary words. It's front-loaded with the essential information and wastes no space on redundant or decorative language.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a destructive operation with no output schema, the description provides the minimum viable information. It identifies what the tool does but lacks important context about the stopping behavior, expected outcomes, error conditions, or what happens after stopping. Given that this is a mutation tool with potential side effects, more completeness would be beneficial.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the input schema already fully documents the single 'runId' parameter. The description doesn't add any additional semantic context about the parameter beyond what's in the schema (e.g., where to find the runId, format requirements, or validation rules). The baseline score of 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Stop') and target resource ('a running BugBug suite run'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from its sibling 'stop_test_run' - both involve stopping operations, so the description lacks sibling differentiation that would warrant a score of 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. There's no mention of prerequisites (e.g., the suite run must be actively running), no exclusion criteria, and no comparison with related tools like 'stop_test_run' or 'wait_for_suite_run' which might be alternatives in different scenarios.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/simplypixi/bugbug-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server