Tencent Cloud Live MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

drop_live_stream

Disconnect a live stream by specifying stream name, domain, and app path to stop broadcasting content on Tencent Cloud Live.

Instructions

断开直播流

    Args:
        stream_name: 流名称
        domain_name: 推流域名
        app_name: 推流路径

    Returns:
        请求ID

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": "drop_live_stream"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`app_name`	No	推流路径，与推流和播放地址中的AppName保持一致，默认为live
`domain_name`	No	您的推流域名。示例值：5000.livepush.myqcloud.com
`stream_name`	No	流名称。示例值：stream1

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedJan 26, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While '断开' (disconnect) implies a destructive action, the description doesn't clarify whether this is reversible, what permissions are required, whether it affects viewers, or what happens to the stream data. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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?

The description is efficiently structured with a clear purpose statement followed by parameter and return documentation. Every sentence serves a purpose, though the parameter listing could be more integrated with the main description.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a destructive operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what '断开' actually means operationally, what the request ID represents, or what side effects occur. The agent lacks crucial context to use this tool safely and effectively.

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 fully documents all three parameters. The description lists the parameters but adds no additional meaning beyond what's in the schema descriptions. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 ('断开直播流' - disconnect live stream) and resource (live stream), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'forbid_live_stream' or 'resume_live_stream', which prevents a perfect score.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'forbid_live_stream' or 'resume_live_stream'. There's no mention of prerequisites, consequences, or appropriate contexts for disconnecting a live stream.

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