Skip to main content
Glama

Immersive Commons

by com.immersivecommons

Set a feature module AVAILABLE on this floor (Super-Admin)

floorcast_set_feature_availability
Idempotent

Super-Admin (apex flag AND operator-on-THIS-floor) sets which modules a floor is ALLOWED to enable. PERSISTS the tenant record (inc-6). Runs the FULL per-tenant super-admin gate first: a floor-admin WITHOUT the apex flag, or a super-admin on a DIFFERENT floor, gets { ok:false, reason:'forbidden' } (no write). A live KV write failure surfaces { ok:false, reason:'write-failed', error } (no 500). On success returns { ok:true, record }. NOTE: the force-disable kill-switch (setForceDisabled) is intentionally NOT exposed as an MCP verb this increment — it stays human/lib-only as a deliberate safety posture (re-evaluated when the inc-7 human override console lands). Args: { module, available }.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
moduleYesModule id (one of the 8 enum modules).
availableYestrue to make available, false to remove.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond annotations (idempotent, not destructive), the description adds the full auth gate logic, error response shapes for forbidden and write-failure, and the successful return format. This provides essential behavioral context for safe invocation.

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 a single dense paragraph with every sentence adding value: purpose, auth, errors, note on kill-switch, and args. Efficient and front-loaded.

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 auth, error modes, and return format without an output schema. It does not list the concrete module IDs (schema only says 'one of the 8 enum modules'), leaving a small gap for the agent.

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% with descriptions for both 'module' and 'available'. The description only mentions the args without adding new detail or clarifying the module ID enum values, so it adds no extra semantic value.

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 the tool sets which modules a floor is allowed to enable, targeting Super-Admin with apex flag on the same floor. It distinguishes from potential siblings by noting the 'force-disable kill-switch' is not exposed, and the title reinforces the action.

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?

The description explicitly states the security gate (apex flag, same floor) and provides a clear 'when not to use' by noting the force-disable kill-switch is intentionaly not exposed. However, it does not directly compare to the sibling tool 'floorcast_set_feature_enabled'.

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

All Immersive Commons toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools are clearly scoped to distinct actions (e.g., ic_hack_apply vs. ic_hack_register, ic_rooms_create vs. ic_rooms_join). A few pairs could confuse an agent: floor10_submit_highlight vs. floorcast_push both submit HighlightStories but to different queues, and ic_directory_search / ic_agent_directory_lookup / ic_admin_list_members overlap in searching members. Overall, the long descriptions help disambiguate, but the volume requires careful reading.

Naming Consistency3/5

The dominant pattern is ic_<domain>_<verb>_<object> (e.g., ic_admin_list_pending_events, ic_headsets_checkout), but there are notable deviations: floor10_* and floorcast_* prefixes break the ic_ convention, and a few tools use noun-style names (ic_health, ic_capabilities, ic_donations_total). Verb placement also varies (get_* vs *_get, e.g., ic_get_my_membership vs. ic_membership_set_profile). Still, most names are readable and predictable.

Tool Count1/5

175 tools is an extreme count for a single MCP server, far beyond the 50+ threshold that indicates an unwieldy surface. While the platform covers many domains (events, files, hackathon, headsets, prints, rooms, etc.), bundling everything into one server makes discovery and selection difficult. This would be better split into several narrowly-scoped servers.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers nearly every lifecycle for each domain: CRUD for files/folders, full hackathon admissions and judging, headset lending with waivers and incidents, print farm submission and handoffs, and room coordination. Minor gaps exist: no delete for files/folders, no cancel for events, and some actions (like revoking a Z.ai key or tearing down a room) are explicitly left to human console use. Overall, the surface is remarkably comprehensive for the stated scope.

Resources