EchoRelay

set_outbound_allowlist

Destructive

Narrow the project's outbound host allowlist — the hosts a target may point at. The current list is on get_project as outboundHostAllowlist (empty means any public host). This tool may only narrow it: patterns must be a strict subset of, or equal to, the current list, compared as exact strings — submitting a wildcard that would cover an existing exact host, or clearing to empty, is refused as a widen. Widening the list is web-only, in the panel. Refused when the project already has a target (inactive lines included) outside the submitted list. Requires edit access.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`patterns`	Yes	The full replacement list of allowed hosts, e.g. ["api.stripe.com", "*.internal.example.com"]. Must be a subset of the current outboundHostAllowlist.

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true) by detailing exact-string comparison, refusing wildcard widening, refusing clearing to empty, and requiring edit access. These are behavioral traits the agent needs to know and are not in the schema.

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 front-loaded with the purpose and then packs in necessary edge cases. It is dense but not padded. The complexity justifies the length; every sentence contributes essential context.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Despite no output schema, the description covers the full operational context: current list source, narrowing-only constraint, refusal scenarios, access requirements, and the web-only alternative for widening. This is complete for a tool with this complexity.

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?

The schema already covers the param definition and subset requirement, but the description adds critical semantics: strict subset/equal comparison, exact-string matching, and refusal of wildcard expansion. This meaningfully supplements the schema, though the schema coverage is high.

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 specific verb and resource: 'Narrow the project's outbound host allowlist.' It clearly distinguishes itself by emphasizing this tool only narrows, never widens, which differentiates it from any potential sibling or web-based action.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: widening is 'web-only, in the panel,' so this tool is for narrowing. It tells users to check the current list via get_project, and states clear refusal conditions (existing targets outside the submitted list). This is strong when-to-use/not-use guidance.

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

All EchoRelay tools Inspect

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

A3.6/5.0

Disambiguation3/5

Most tools target distinct resources and the descriptions are unusually explicit, but the billing cluster (change_plan/cancel_subscription and the many add-on actions) plus the preview/diff tools overlap and could cause mis-selection. config_diff, dry_run_endpoint, and preview_line_draft all read as 'preview what will change' at first glance despite different scopes.

Naming Consistency4/5

The overwhelming majority follow a clean snake_case verb_noun pattern: create_*, get_*, list_*, set_*, update_*, delete_*. It is only held back by a few naming outliers such as config_diff and default_endpoint_template, which break the verb-first convention.

Tool Count1/5

78 tools is an extreme mismatch for an MCP server surface, even accounting for the broad management/relay domain. Such a large surface will overwhelm model context and make tool selection materially harder; this would be better split into focused servers for configuration, data-plane operations, and billing.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface is very thorough: projects, lines, endpoints, credentials, keys, configs/drafts, DLQ, requests, metrics, audit, team, and billing are all represented. Only minor gaps exist, such as no direct single-line get/update and the intentional inability to widen the outbound allowlist or lift archive protection via API.

Resources

Need Help?