Skip to main content
Glama

DC Member API

by io.github.dynamitecircle

rooms_messages

GET /rooms/:roomID/messages — List messages in a room

List messages in a room you are a member of. Read-only — no write side effects, no unread-state mutation, no reactions/posts/edits. Cursor-paginated newest-first.

Access: strict — the caller must be a subscribed member of the room (same seen doc check used by the web inbox). For browsable public channels, any DCer can read. Private rooms, DMs (dm), group DMs (group), event rooms, and city/country/mastermind rooms hard-block non-members with 403. Hidden/deleted/sunk messages are excluded.

Pagination: pass ?before=<nextCursor> from a previous response to fetch the next (older) page. Default page size 50, max 50.

See also: For specific content in this room (did anyone mention X?), POST /search/messages with q= and roomID= searches body text directly — far faster than paginating with ?before. This endpoint is the right call when you want a chronological window (last N messages, conversation reconstruction); search is the right call when you want a topic.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax results (1-50)
beforeNoCursor from a previous response's `nextCursor` (encodes the previous page's oldest message timestamp). Pass to fetch the next older page.
roomIDYesRoom ID. Discover from `GET /rooms` (your subscribed list), `GET /inbox/unread`, `trip.roomID` on `GET /trips/:tripID`, or event chat-room IDs on `GET /events/:eventID`.

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It clearly states read-only behavior, no side effects, exclusion of hidden/deleted/sunk messages, and cursor-paginated, newest-first order. This is comprehensive.

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?

Well-structured with clear sections, front-loaded purpose and key behavior. Each sentence adds value; no waste. Slightly longer than necessary but still efficient for the complexity.

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?

Given no output schema, description covers pagination, access rules, exclusion of certain messages, and sibling differentiation. Could mention response format (list of message objects) but is adequate for agent selection and invocation.

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%, baseline 3. Description adds extra meaning: for 'before' it explains it encodes the previous page's oldest message timestamp; for 'roomID' it lists discovery methods; for 'limit' confirms max 50. Adds value beyond schema.

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 clearly states the tool lists messages in a room with explicit verb ('List') and resource ('messages in a room'). It distinguishes from sibling search_messages by describing use cases (chronological window vs topic search).

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives: 'This endpoint is the right call when you want a chronological window... search is the right call when you want a topic.' Also details access restrictions and pagination usage.

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

All DC Member API toolsInspect
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

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Despite the large number of tools, each has a detailed description that clearly distinguishes its purpose. Minor potential overlaps (e.g., search vs. resource-specific search, own vs. other's agenda) are well documented, so an agent can differentiate them.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names follow a consistent verb_noun or resource_subresource_action pattern in snake_case. A few tools are just nouns (e.g., 'alerts', 'announcements'), but these are top-level listing endpoints; overall the naming is predictable.

Tool Count2/5

85 tools is very high for a single server, making it difficult for an agent to efficiently explore and select the right tool. While each tool seems justified for the broad domain, the count feels overwhelming and could be streamlined.

Completeness3/5

The tool surface covers most major areas (events, trips, chapters, rooms, search, profile, etc.) with CRUD or lifecycle operations. However, the lack of a 'send message' tool for rooms is a notable gap, and some resources (e.g., events) are read-only on creation/update, limiting agent workflows.

Resources