agent4.io

configure_share

Configure this share — its name and its appearance — fields you don't pass stay as they are (server-side partial merge).

- `label`: the name at the top of the chat page, and the browser tab's title. **Renaming a
  share is this call**; you never need to create a replacement and delete the old one. That
  would mint a new token, so the link already embedded in the client's site would stop working
  — the visible name and the address are not the same thing.
- `theme_color`: the brand colour, `#RGB` or `#RRGGBB`. **This one colour is all you give** —
  its foregrounds are derived on save.
- `highlight_color`: **only if the brand actually has a second colour.** Most don't; leave it
  out and nothing changes anywhere. When set, it is used where something should be visible
  without competing with the primary action: the second series in a chart, and citation
  markers. Buttons, the current storyline step and user bubbles stay on `theme_color` — two
  colours fighting over the same element is how a two-colour palette goes wrong. Foregrounds
  are derived from it the same way.
  Text/foreground colours are derived server-side to WCAG contrast and stored (a light brand
  colour automatically gets dark text instead of white) — **do not compute a palette yourself
  and do not try to set text colours**; they would be overridden.
- `logo_url`: absolute URL. The header scales by height, any aspect ratio fits; **the collapsed
  launcher bubble is square**, so only near-square images (aspect 0.74–1.35) are used on the
  bubble — a wide wordmark falls back to the platform icon there. Want your mark in both
  places? Provide a square variant too.
- `input_mode`: `text` (text box, default) or `voice` (opens in push-to-talk). Requires the
  platform's voice backend.
- `launcher`: hover tooltip text for the bubble. `theme`: `light` / `dark` / empty = follow the
  visitor.
- `custom_css`: the escape hatch for strict brand guidelines — the injected stylesheet can
  override our CSS variables (`--acc` / `--acc-fg` / `--acc-text-l` / `--acc-text-d` / `--bg` /
  `--surface` / `--text` / `--border`); write light values under `:root{…}` and dark under
  `html[data-theme="dark"]{…}`. **Prefer theme_color**: it carries a readability guarantee,
  with custom_css the contrast is on you.

Get the token from `list_shares` first. Full examples in the Cookbook's configure-branding.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`label`	No
`theme`	No
`token`	Yes
`launcher`	No
`logo_url`	No
`agent_name`	Yes
`custom_css`	No
`input_mode`	No
`theme_color`	No
`highlight_color`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

TDQS

A5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full responsibility. It discloses server-side partial merge, derived foreground colors with WCAG contrast, overrides, logo fallback behavior, and custom_css behavior. This is rich, honest behavioral disclosure beyond what schema could provide.

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?

Though lengthy, the description is well-structured with bullet points and bolded key terms. Every paragraph adds value, no filler. The opening sentence states the overall purpose, and each parameter bullet is focused and informative. The length is justified by the tool's complexity.

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?

The description covers all parameters, prerequisites, alternatives, edge cases, and behavioral nuances (e.g., logo aspect ratios, color derivation, custom_css variables). It also references external examples. With an output schema present, there is no need to describe return values. This is a complete and self-sufficient description.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate fully. It explains each parameter's meaning, format, defaults, and behavioral effects: label, theme_color, highlight_color, logo_url, input_mode, launcher, theme, and custom_css. Even token is mentioned ('Get the token from list_shares first'). Only agent_name is not described in detail, but the overall compensation is outstanding.

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+resource: 'Configure this share — its name and its appearance.' It clearly distinguishes itself from create_share by stating that renaming is this call and you never need to create a replacement. This is precise and differentiates from siblings.

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 when-to-use guidance: renaming should use this call instead of delete/recreate. It gives a prerequisite ('Get the token from list_shares first') and recommends preferring theme_color over custom_css. Also notes input_mode's voice backend requirement. This is clear context with alternatives and exclusions.

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

All agent4.io 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

Disambiguation4/5

Tools are mostly distinct by domain and action. A few pairs like add_knowledge_file vs add_knowledge_text or build_knowledge_index vs patch_knowledge_index could cause confusion, but descriptions clearly differentiate them.

Naming Consistency4/5

The vast majority follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (create_*, list_*, get_*, update_*). A few outliers like tenant_info, usage_stats, and page_context_stats are noun-first, deviating slightly from the otherwise uniform scheme.

Tool Count1/5

With 50 tools, this is a very large surface that exceeds typical well-scoped server sizes. Even for a broad platform management API, the sheer number makes it heavy and potentially overwhelming, matching the '50+' extreme mismatch category.

Completeness2/5

The server covers creation, reading, updating, and listing for most resources but lacks any delete operations (no delete_agent, delete_knowledge_base, delete_skill, delete_share, delete_storyline, delete_page_context). This is a significant gap in lifecycle coverage that will force agents to work around missing functionality.

Resources

Need Help?