Skip to main content
Glama
snow-wind-001

CodeRecoder MCP

by snow-wind-001
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Deactivate Code Backup

deactivate_project
Idempotent

Stops automatic monitoring, clears the active project, and creates a final checkpoint by default.

Instructions

Create a final checkpoint by default, stop automatic monitoring, and clear this process-local active project.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
createFinalCheckpointNoDefaults to true

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNo
errorNo
messageYes
successYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changedv3.1.0
    • addedInput schema / $schema
      Added value: +"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
    • addedInput schema / properties / createFinalCheckpoint
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Defaults to true",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / saveHistory
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Whether to save current history before deactivating",
-  "optional": true,
-  "type": "boolean"
-}
    • removedInput schema / required
      Removed value: -[]
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "additionalProperties": {},
+      "propertyNames": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "error": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "message": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "success": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "success",
+    "message"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With annotations already declaring non-readOnly, non-destructive, idempotent behavior, the description adds meaningful side-effect context: a final checkpoint is created by default, automatic monitoring stops, and the active project is cleared. It does not contradict any annotation and goes beyond what the annotations provide.

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?

A single compact sentence lists the three key effects without filler. The default behavior is front-loaded, and every clause earns its place.

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?

Given the rich annotations, a complete output schema, and full parameter schema coverage, the description supplies enough behavioral context for a safe deactivation call. It is only missing explicit lifecycle usage guidance, which is a minor gap rather than a functional omission.

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 baseline is 3. The description's phrase 'Create a final checkpoint by default' mirrors the createFinalCheckpoint parameter default already documented in the schema, adding little semantic detail beyond the property name and schema description.

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 states specific effects: creating a final checkpoint, stopping automatic monitoring, and clearing the process-local active project. It identifies the resource (active project) and distinguishes the tool as the deactivation counterpart to activate_project, though it never names the sibling explicitly.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as activate_project or delete_project_snapshot. The agent must infer the lifecycle context from the tool name and sibling list alone.

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