Skip to main content
Glama

busabase

by com.busabase
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Read, enable, or revoke a node's public share link

node_share

Read, enable, or revoke a node's public share link

A share link is a BEARER CAPABILITY: anyone holding the URL can use it, with no account. Only enable one when the user explicitly asks to share or publish that node, and only reveal the URL when they ask for it. capability: submit additionally lets anonymous visitors write — never the default. To grant access to a named person inside the workspace use node_permission instead.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actionYesWhat to do. Choose this before the other arguments.
nodeIdYesNode to inspect or change.
passwordNoOptional password gate for the link.
playbookNoOptional. The playbook you are following, as `kind:nodeId[:key]` from playbooks_search (e.g. `prompt:nod_123:log-visit`). Recorded on the change request so the person can see which playbook produced it.
expiresAtNoISO 8601 expiry. Omit for a link that does not expire.
capabilityNoWhat visitors may do. `submit` allows anonymous writes — use deliberately.
targetSpaceIdNoBusabase space id. Call auth_verify first and ask the user which space to use when more than one is returned.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / playbook
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional. The playbook you are following, as `kind:nodeId[:key]` from playbooks_search (e.g. `prompt:nod_123:log-visit`). Recorded on the change request so the person can see which playbook produced it.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses the critical bearer-capability behavior: anyone holding the URL can use it with no account. It also warns about the anonymous-write risk of capability: submit, explicitly stating it should never be the default. This adds essential behavioral context that the annotations alone do not 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?

The description is compact and front-loaded: the action triad is stated first, followed by a focused security warning and a sibling routing note. Every sentence earns its place, with no filler or redundant restatement of the title.

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?

The description covers the key misuse scenarios, bearer-capability implications, alternative tool routing, and the non-default nature of anonymous writes. However, there is no output schema and the description does not explicitly describe what the 'get' action returns, though it implies the URL. Slightly more return-value clarity would make it fully complete.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the parameter schema already documents nodeId, action, password, playbook, expiresAt, capability, and targetSpaceId. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by tying capability and action to user consent and URL disclosure, particularly the 'capability: submit ... never the default' guardrail.

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 opens with a clear verb+resource combination: 'Read, enable, or revoke a node's public share link'. It also differentiates this tool from node_permission by explicitly naming the alternative for named-person access, so an agent can disambiguate even among many sibling tools.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description gives explicit guidance on when to use the tool: only enable a share link when the user explicitly asks to share or publish, and only reveal the URL on request. It also names node_permission as the correct alternative for granting access to a named person inside the workspace, providing clear routing between siblings.

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

All busabase toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources