AiLinkAny

Write to persistent process input

process_write_stdin

Destructive

Writes input to a running persistent process session. Use only when the process is expecting stdin. 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": {
      "session_id": "<session_id>",
      "input": "<input>"
    },
    "name": "process_write_stdin"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`input`	Yes
`device_id`	No	Target computer device_id. Omit when only one computer is paired.
`session_id`	Yes
`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`	No	Optional Workspace id from open_workspace for project-scoped work.
`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.
`append_newline`	No	Append CRLF after the input. Defaults to false.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the meaningful constraint that the target process must be awaiting stdin, but it never says what a write to a non-expecting process does, whether the write is recoverable, or how session state is affected.

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 operation and the stdin precondition are front-loaded correctly. But roughly half the text is generic selection boilerplate ('Select this tool from the user's intent when it is the best match', 'The user does not need to mention ailinkany.com, MCP, a connector...') that does not help an agent invoke the tool correctly.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With an output schema and full annotations, the description does not need to explain return values. Still, for a 9-parameter destructive write tool, the absence of any note on failure behavior, session targeting, or interaction with process_send_control leaves meaningful gaps.

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 coverage is 78%, so most parameters are already documented. The description contributes one useful clarification — that the destination may be explicit or inherited from project/conversation context, which explains why device_id and device_name are optional — but says nothing about session_id, input limits, or retry_token beyond the schema.

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?

The first sentence states a specific verb plus resource: writing input into a running persistent process session. That is concrete enough to separate it from process_read_output and process_send_control, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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?

'Use only when the process is expecting stdin' is a real precondition that narrows usage. However, no alternative tool is named for the cases this one does not fit (control signals, new sessions, shell execution), and the remaining guidance is generic invocation boilerplate rather than decision criteria.

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?