EXZA Remote

Append commander file

exza_append_commander_file

Destructive

Append text to an authorized file only when its current SHA-256 matches expectedSha256. For replacing a specific span use exza_edit_commander_file. Requires account-bound computer:write OAuth and any prompted local owner approval.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "path": "<path>",
      "text": "<text>",
      "expectedSha256": "<expectedSha256>"
    },
    "name": "exza_append_commander_file"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`path`	Yes	Explicit path inside the scope for this tool; no symlink traversal where prohibited.
`text`	Yes	User-approved text to type, append, replace, or report; may be sensitive.
`expectedSha256`	Yes	Lowercase SHA-256 from the prior read; prevents overwriting changed content.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false), the description discloses the optimistic-concurrency guard, the required OAuth scope, and the possibility of an interactive local owner approval prompt — exactly the context an agent needs before invoking a mutating file operation.

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?

Three short sentences: the action and guard first, the alternative second, the auth requirement last. No filler and no restatement of the tool name.

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?

Since there is no output schema, the description could state what happens on a hash mismatch or what the call returns, but for a 3-parameter tool with full schema coverage and rich annotations, everything needed to call it correctly is present.

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 all three parameters are already documented; the description only reinforces expectedSha256 as the match precondition. It adds little syntax or format detail beyond the schema, which is the expected baseline.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource (append text to an authorized file) plus the guard condition (current SHA-256 must match expectedSha256), which lets an agent distinguish it from overwrite/read siblings without opening a schema.

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?

Explicitly routes span replacement to exza_edit_commander_file and states the preconditions (SHA match, computer:write OAuth, local owner approval). It does not, however, contrast with the equally close sibling exza_write_authorized_file, so an agent must guess append-vs-overwrite selection.

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

All EXZA Remote tools Inspect

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

Need Help?