share_session
Make a session publicly readable and return its absolute share URL.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| session_id | Yes |
Output Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Computer-Use Agents API
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description must carry the full burden. However, it does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the action is reversible, if authentication is required, or any rate limits. The phrase 'make publicly readable' implies a mutation but lacks detail on side effects.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness3/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is very concise, consisting of one sentence. However, it is too sparse for a tool with no annotations and minimal schema details. While front-loaded clarity is good, the brevity sacrifices essential information.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness2/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the lack of annotations and output schema details (though output schema exists), the description is incomplete. It does not explain what 'publicly readable' entails, whether the URL is permanent, or any associated permissions. The agent lacks enough context to use the tool confidently.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters1/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0% and the description adds no meaning beyond the parameter name 'session_id'. It does not explain format, constraints, or examples, leaving the agent without guidance on how to provide a valid value.
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 action (make a session publicly readable) and the resource (session), and specifies the output (absolute share URL). It distinguishes from sibling tools like cancel_session or wait_for_session, which have different purposes.
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?
No usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or contexts where it should not be used.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool targets a distinct resource and action: session lifecycle (run, cancel, wait, message, share), file operations (list, read, write), and agent discovery. No two tools have overlapping purposes; even the session-related tools are clearly separated by their verb.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (cancel_session, list_files, run_agent, etc.). The pattern is uniform across session, file, and agent operations, making the API highly predictable.
Tool Count5/5
With 9 tools, the server is well-scoped for a computer-use agent API. It covers agent discovery, session lifecycle, messaging, sharing, and file access without unnecessary bloat, fitting comfortably in the ideal 3-15 range.
Completeness4/5
The tool set covers the core workflow: list agents, run them, wait for results, send follow-ups, cancel, share, and access files. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no list_sessions or delete_file), but they do not block the primary use case.