Skip to main content
Glama

dialogbrain

by io.github.saloprj
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

search_links

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search links/URLs shared across the workspace — by type, owner, or associated contact. For files use search.files; for message content use search.messages.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum links to return.
ownerNoLink owner: 'self' (user's own) or 'contact' (from others). OMIT to include links regardless of owner.
queryNoWhat to search for in shared links.
link_kindNoFilter links by type. OMIT to include all kinds — picking a value narrows the search and is a common cause of zero-result mistakes.
contact_hintNoName hint to filter links for a specific contact. OMIT to skip.
in_workspaceNoRun this one call in this workspace id instead of the session's. Nothing is stored; other sessions are not affected.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / in_workspace
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Run this one call in this workspace id instead of the session's. Nothing is stored; other sessions are not affected.",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  2. Added
  3. Removed
  4. Added

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the 'shared across the workspace' scope, and says nothing about rate limits, result volume beyond the schema's limit, or return format. A 3 is appropriate given annotations carry the behavioral load.

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?

Two tight sentences, zero waste. The primary capability is front-loaded and the disambiguation follows, so the most decision-relevant content comes first.

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 read-only search tool with complete annotations and full schema coverage, the description covers what is searched and where the boundaries lie with siblings. It stops short of describing return shape or pagination, but with no output schema and a low-complexity read operation this is only a minor gap.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all six parameters including enum meanings and OMIT behavior. The description's 'by type, owner, or associated contact' roughly maps to link_kind/owner/contact_hint but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Search links/URLs shared across the workspace') and immediately scopes it ('by type, owner, or associated contact'). It explicitly names the sibling tools to use for adjacent needs (files, message content), so an agent can route 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 Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives explicit when-to-use (shared links/URLs) and when-not alternatives ('For files use search.files; for message content use search.messages'). This is a textbook alternative-routing statement, leaving little to inference.

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

All dialogbrain 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