Phase Router

session

Destructive

Saved chat sessions on Phase Router: create one (returns an id and a shareable /s/ link), read its thread, list the wallet's sessions (wallet mode only: signed with the wallet key, no transaction), or delete one. Pass the id as session to chat and the gateway carries the context between turns and visits.

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": {
      "action": "<action>"
    },
    "name": "session"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	No	session id (get, delete)
`model`	No	create: model the session starts with (informational; each chat names its own)
`title`	No	create: title (defaults to the first message)
`action`	Yes	create \| get \| list \| delete
`system`	No	create: system prompt kept for every turn

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`url`	Yes
`model`	No
`title`	No
`system`	No
`deleted`	No
`messages`	Yes
`requests`	Yes
`sessions`	No
`spent_usd`	Yes
`expires_at`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 22, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=false, so the mutation profile is known. The description adds real value by disclosing that create returns an id plus a shareable /s/<id> link (a side effect with visibility implications) and that list requires wallet-key signing without a transaction. It does not, however, say whether deletion is recoverable or what happens to a link after deletion.

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 sentences carry the full action list, the wallet-mode caveat for list, and the cross-tool linkage with no filler. The action enumeration is front-loaded and readable as a quick decision surface.

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 four-action tool with an output schema, this covers the important agent-facing gaps: auth mode for list, the shareable link from create, and continuation into chat. Minor omissions remain around list result volume/paging and post-delete link behavior, but nothing essential for a correct call 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 description coverage is 100%, so per-parameter documentation is already handled. The description still contributes beyond the schema by mapping which actions take an id and by explaining that the returned id is the same value passed as `session` to the chat sibling, which the schema cannot convey.

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 names the resource ('Saved chat sessions on Phase Router') and enumerates the four concrete actions: create (with its return value), read thread, list, delete. It also explicitly distinguishes the relationship to the chat sibling by saying the id is passed as `session` to chat, so an agent can tell what this tool does versus chat.

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?

It gives per-action usage context, including a non-obvious constraint that listing only works in wallet mode (signed with the wallet key, no transaction) and a routing hint toward chat for carrying context. It does not state when to prefer an unpersisted chat over creating a session, or when to delete versus let a session stand, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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

All Phase Router 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?