EaseWeb

Access settings

get_access

Read-onlyIdempotent

The access settings of your presentation: its own level ("open", "public", "private"), the level that counts ("effective_level": a presentation of a project inherits the project's level when that one is stricter), who was given access (and which role), and the pending requests.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`slug`	Yes	The presentation's slug (its address: /movie/<slug>/).

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`level`	Yes	open, public or private: the presentation's own level.
`grants`	No
`project_level`	No	The level of its project, if any.
`effective_level`	No	The level that counts (the project's one when stricter).
`pending_requests`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 23, 2026
- addedOutput schema / properties / pending_requests / items / properties / title / description
```
Added value: +"Its title; null while you may not see it (a private one you asked for)."
```
- changedOutput schema / properties / pending_requests / items / properties / title / type
```
Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```

Changed6 schema fields changedSep 29, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / effective_level

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The level that counts (the project's one when stricter).",
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedOutput schema / properties / level / description

Previous value: -"open, public or private."New value: +"open, public or private: the presentation's own level."

changedOutput schema / properties / pending_requests / items / properties / presentation / description

Previous value: -"Slug of the presentation."New value: +"Slug of the presentation (null: a project)."

changedOutput schema / properties / pending_requests / items / properties / presentation / type
```
Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```

addedOutput schema / properties / pending_requests / items / properties / project

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Slug of the project, for access to all of it.",
+  "type": [
+    "string",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / project_level

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The level of its project, if any.",
+  "type": [
+    "string",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}

Changed1 schema field changedSep 28, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "grants": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "role": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "since": {
+            "description": "ISO 8601 date and time.",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "user": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "level": {
+      "description": "open, public or private.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "pending_requests": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "agent": {
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "created_at": {
+            "description": "ISO 8601 date and time.",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "id": {
+            "type": "integer"
+          },
+          "message": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "presentation": {
+            "description": "Slug of the presentation.",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "role": {
+            "description": "view or edit.",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "status": {
+            "description": "pending, approved or declined.",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "title": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "user": {
+            "description": "Who asks.",
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "id",
+          "status"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "level"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 28, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive/closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely non-obvious semantics: that 'effective_level' can differ from the presentation's own level because a project's stricter level is inherited. That is behavioral context an agent cannot get from the schema or annotations.

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?

One front-loaded sentence that enumerates return content with two tight parentheticals. It is efficient, though the sentence is a noun phrase rather than a statement of action, which slightly weakens the opening.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no prose, and annotations cover the safety profile; the one input is fully described in the schema. The meaningful remaining gap is that the boundary with list_access_requests and set_access is never stated, which matters in a 48-tool surface.

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% and the single slug parameter is already documented in the schema as the address form /movie/<slug>/. The description adds nothing about the parameter, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 enumerates exactly what the tool returns: own level, effective_level (with the inheritance rule), granted access with roles, and pending requests. That is a specific resource with real content, not tautology. It stops short of naming what distinguishes it from siblings like set_access or list_access_requests, which overlap on the 'pending requests' and 'level' concepts.

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?

There is no when-to-use statement, no prerequisite, and no alternative named. The reader must infer from the name that this is the read counterpart to set_access, and the description's mention of 'pending requests' actually blurs the line with list_access_requests without resolving it.

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

All EaseWeb 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?