Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

TransformPipe

by io.github.raudarlabs
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Share a folder

tp_share_folder
DestructiveIdempotent

Sets who can open a folder — every document in it and in its subfolders, shown as one page at /f/… — and returns the sharing mode, URL and reader list. Use it when the user asks to share, publish or unshare a folder, or to add or remove a reader. Modes: "link" (anyone with the URL), "people" (the listed addresses, who sign in to read it) and "private" (revokes the link; a URL already sent stops working). "link" and "people" require confirm: true; without it nothing changes and the response describes what would be disclosed. "private" needs no confirmation. For "people", emails replaces the reader list, and add and remove change individual addresses. Addresses new to the list are emailed a link. Documents saved into the folder later are shared the same way.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "folder": "<folder>",
      "mode": "<mode>"
    },
    "name": "tp_share_folder"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
addNoAddresses to add to the current reader list for mode "people". They are emailed a link.
modeYesWho can open it: private, link or people. Required.
emailsNoThe complete reader list for mode "people"; it replaces the current list.
folderYesThe folder: an id from tp_list_folders, or a path from the top such as "Devart AI/Home".
removeNoAddresses to remove from the current reader list for mode "people".
confirmNoRequired when `mode` is "link" or "people". Set true after the user has agreed to that audience.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations: it discloses the confirmation gate ('without it nothing changes and the response describes what would be disclosed'), the revocation consequence ('a URL already sent stops working'), that new addresses are emailed a link, and that documents added later inherit the sharing. These are exactly the side effects an agent must know before a destructiveHint=true call.

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 what the tool does and what it returns, then the when-to-use sentence, then mode semantics. Dense but every clause carries information; the only cost is a long opening sentence with an em-dash parenthetical that takes a second pass to parse.

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?

For a 6-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers the return value (sharing mode, URL, reader list), the confirmation protocol, per-mode behavior, and the propagation rule for future documents. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it safely is missing.

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 baseline would be 3; the description adds real meaning on top — which modes require `confirm`, that `private` needs none, that `emails` replaces rather than appends while `add`/`remove` mutate individual entries, and that new addresses receive email. It stops short of restating the folder id/path format, which is fine since the schema covers it.

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?

States a specific verb and resource — 'Sets who can open a folder' — and immediately defines scope as 'every document in it and in its subfolders', which cleanly separates it from tp_share_document and tp_update_folder without the agent needing to open the 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?

Explicit trigger conditions are given: 'Use it when the user asks to share, publish or unshare a folder, or to add or remove a reader.' The folder-vs-document distinction is implied by the emphasis on folder scope, but the sibling tp_share_document is never named, so the routing rule must be inferred.

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

All TransformPipe 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