Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

mu

by mu.micro
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Write shell

shell_write

Put a file in your account's container sandbox, creating any missing directories. The only file operation that is not a shell command, because it is the one a shell is bad at: source is full of quotes and backticks and a heredoc will mangle it. The content arrives as a string and reaches the file without a shell seeing it. To read, list, search or change a file, use the shell — cat, ls, grep and sed are right there

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": {
      "path": "<path>",
      "content": "<content>"
    },
    "name": "shell_write"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYesWhere to put it, relative to /work — not to the directory your last command left you in. Missing directories are created
contentYesThe whole file. This replaces what was there

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added
  2. Removed
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / path / description
      Previous value: -"Where to put it, under /work. Missing directories are created"New value: +"Where to put it, relative to /work — not to the directory your last command left you in. Missing directories are created"
  4. Added

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses an important behavioral trait: it avoids shell mangling of quotes and backticks by passing content as a string directly to the file. This is beyond the basic write operation and helps set expectations about how content is handled. No annotations contradict this behavior.

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?

The description is slightly verbose but every sentence contributes meaningful context. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and then explains the rationale and usage boundaries. No fluff, though it could be trimmed without losing value.

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 simple two-parameter write tool, the description covers what it does, why it exists, and when to use it. It does not discuss errors, permissions, or edge cases, but those are not critical for such a straightforward operation. The description is complete enough for an agent to correctly invoke the tool.

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?

The schema already provides thorough descriptions for both parameters (path relative to /work, creating missing directories; content replaces the whole file). The description adds no new parameter-specific meaning beyond rephrasing what the schema already states. Baseline 3 is appropriate given full coverage.

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 tool's function: 'Put a file in your account's container sandbox, creating any missing directories.' It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools by positioning it as the only file operation that is not a shell command.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It explains that shell commands are bad at writing files due to quoting issues, and directs users to use the shell for reading, listing, searching, or changing files. This leaves no ambiguity about tool selection.

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

All mu 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