Skip to main content
Glama

EQVPS — VPS and code sandboxes for AI agents

by io.github.Poiuyhje
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Delegate service access

delegate_service

Grant OPERATOR access to one of YOUR VPS to another person by email (they can power/reinstall/console/hostname/rdns, but NOT renew, cancel or change billing). Sends them an invitation with an accept link. Optional expires_days for time-limited access. Owner-only. Requires: token (owner).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
emailYes
service_idNoService code as returned by list_vps/order_vps, e.g. "68J67T5" (a plain numeric id is also accepted).
expires_daysNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / service_id / description
      Added value: +"Service code as returned by list_vps/order_vps, e.g. \"68J67T5\" (a plain numeric id is also accepted)."
    • removedInput schema / properties / service_id / exclusiveMinimum
      Removed value: -0
    • addedInput schema / properties / service_id / minLength
      Added value: +1
    • changedInput schema / properties / service_id / type
      Previous value: -"integer"New value: +"string"
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "service_id",
-  "email"
-]New value: +[
+  "email"
+]
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it enumerates exactly what the delegate can do (power/reinstall/console/hostname/rdns) and what they cannot (renew, cancel, change billing), plus the invitation-with-accept-link flow and owner-token requirement. It omits revocation semantics and rate limits, but the permission boundary disclosure is unusually rich.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and scope, then permissions, mechanism, and preconditions in quick succession. The parenthetical permission list is dense but earns its place; there is no filler or repetition.

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?

For a 3-param mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers action, permission boundaries, invitation flow, and authorization requirement. An agent has enough to call it correctly; only return-value expectations and post-invitation lifecycle are left implicit.

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 only 33% (only service_id is documented), so the description must compensate and largely does: it clarifies email is the invitee's address, and that expires_days yields time-limited access. service_id is left entirely to the schema, but the description still adds meaningful semantics for the other two parameters.

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?

Specific verb (Grant) plus resource (OPERATOR access to one of YOUR VPS) plus the mechanism (email invitation with accept link). An agent can immediately distinguish this from accept_delegation, revoke_delegation, and list_delegations without opening any 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?

States the precondition clearly: "Owner-only. Requires: token (owner)." It implies the use case (sharing VPS control without billing authority), though it doesn't explicitly name sibling tools like revoke_delegation or accept_delegation as alternatives or follow-ups.

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

All EQVPS — VPS and code sandboxes for AI agents toolsInspect
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