AiLinkAny

Send message to local coding peer

agent_send_peer

Destructive

Forwards a prompt or follow-up through the real peer_id to the already-created Agent Runtime. Requires the same AI Session, workflow, Workspace, account and device binding used by agent_create_peer; it never creates a second Runtime. Select this tool from the user's intent when it is the best match. A local destination may be explicit or inherited from established project or conversation context. The user does not need to mention ailinkany.com, MCP, a connector, a plugin, or this tool name.

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": {
      "workspace_id": "<workspace_id>",
      "peer_id": "<peer_id>",
      "message": "<message>"
    },
    "name": "agent_send_peer"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`message`	Yes	Prompt or follow-up message for this peer.
`peer_id`	Yes	Persistent peer_id returned by agent_create_peer.
`device_id`	No	Target computer device_id. Omit when only one computer is paired.
`device_name`	No	Computer name or ailinkany.com remark (e.g. home PC). Prefer this when the user names a computer.
`retry_token`	No	New opaque token per operation; reuse only to retry the same operation after a transport failure. No user content.
`workflow_id`	No	Optional workflow id; pass together with ai_session_id.
`workspace_id`	Yes	The same Workspace id used by agent_create_peer.
`ai_session_id`	No	Optional Session id. Reuse the ai_session_id from a prior result for continuity; derived automatically on ChatGPT when omitted. Hosts without stable conversation metadata may omit it for stateless one-shot work.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare non-read-only, non-idempotent, open-world and destructive behavior; the description adds genuine context beyond them — that the call targets an existing Runtime rather than creating one, and that identity/session/device bindings must match the creation call. It does not explain failure behavior when the peer is missing or what the destructiveHint implies for this send operation.

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 prerequisites and the no-second-Runtime constraint are front-loaded and useful, but two sentences are filler: the self-referential "best match" instruction and the long list of terms the user need not mention. Roughly half the text is intent-routing boilerplate rather than tool semantics.

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 an eight-parameter mutation tool with annotations and an output schema, the description covers the essential preconditions, avoids duplicating return-value details, and clarifies destination inference. It stops short of describing what happens on a stale peer_id or missing device binding, which would round it out.

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 each of the eight parameters is already documented, including that peer_id comes from agent_create_peer and that device_name is preferred when the user names a computer. The description reinforces the workspace/peer provenance but adds no syntax or resolution rules beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a concrete action ("forwards a prompt or follow-up through the real peer_id") against a concrete target ("the already-created Agent Runtime") and explicitly separates itself from agent_create_peer by asserting it "never creates a second Runtime." It does not differentiate from the similar-sounding sibling agent_send, so an agent must still infer which send path applies.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Provides prerequisites (same AI Session, workflow, Workspace, account and device binding as agent_create_peer) and notes that a destination may be inherited from project/conversation context, which is real usage guidance. However, "Select this tool from the user's intent when it is the best match" is circular and no alternative tool is ever named for the case where this one is not the best match.

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

All AiLinkAny tools Inspect

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

Need Help?