EaseWeb

Change access

set_access

Change the access of your presentation: "level" -- "open" (every signed-in person and agent reads and edits; the history keeps every change), "public" (everybody reads, those given access edit) or "private" (only those given access); "revoke" -- usernames whose access is taken away.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`slug`	Yes	The presentation's slug (its address: /movie/<slug>/).
`level`	No	New access level: "open", "public" or "private".
`revoke`	No	User names whose access is taken away.

Output Schema

TableJSON 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.

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"
+  ]
+}

Changed3 schema fields changedSep 28, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / level / description

Added value: +"New access level: \"open\", \"public\" or \"private\"."

addedInput schema / properties / revoke / description

Added value: +"User names whose access is taken away."

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

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=false, destructive=false and idempotent=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: 'open' makes the history keep every change, 'public' separates read from edit rights, and 'revoke' strips usernames of access. It still omits prerequisites (e.g. owner-only) and reversibility.

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 leads with the verb and resource before drilling into the level semantics. The quote-and-dash formatting is slightly dense but every clause carries information; nothing is wasted.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be described, and annotations cover the safety profile. The description covers purpose and all three parameters, though it leaves prerequisites and the interaction between setting a level and pre-existing grants unaddressed.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description genuinely adds meaning the schema lacks: the schema only labels the enum values, while the description spells out who can read/edit under each level and the history side effect. This is useful semantic elaboration beyond the structured fields.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Change the access of your presentation', so the agent knows this is the mutator for presentation access. It does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like get_access or request_access, but the verb+resource is unambiguous.

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?

The description never says when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_access (read), request_access (ask for access) or answer_access_request. The level explanations describe parameter values, not tool-selection guidance, so an agent gets no routing help from the text.

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?