Skip to main content
Glama

Send input to a pane

send_input

Send text to a live terminal pane and optionally submit it with a separate Enter keystroke, enabling reliable input to TUI applications.

Instructions

Type text into a live shell. With submit:true the app writes your text, then a SEPARATE bare Enter a beat later — the reliable way to submit a line to a TUI agent (a trailing "\n" in one write is read as a bracketed paste, not Enter). Without submit, include a trailing newline yourself to run a shell command. DANGEROUS: this executes whatever you send in a real terminal. Triple-gated and never on by default — requires (1) the app's "Allow agent control → input" toggle, (2) HYPERPANES_ALLOW_INPUT=1 on this bridge, and (3) confirm=true on every call. See README "send_input safety model".

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesExact bytes to write. With submit:true, pass the line WITHOUT a trailing newline.
ownerNoLock owner, if the pane was locked via lock_pane — required to write a locked pane.
paneIdYes
submitNoWrite a bare Enter as a separate keystroke after the text (submits a TUI line cleanly).
confirmNoMust be true — explicit per-call confirmation.
submitDelayMsNoBeat between the text and the Enter when submit:true (default ~40ms; raise for slow TUIs).
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description fully discloses critical behavioral traits: it executes arbitrary input in a real terminal, is dangerous, and requires triple gating (app toggle, environment variable, and confirm=true). It also explains the subtle Enter-vs-newline behavior. This is exemplary transparency.

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?

While the description is longer than average, every sentence carries essential information—usage, safety, and configuration. It is front-loaded with the core action and then layers critical details efficiently. No wasted words.

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 complex, dangerous tool with 6 params, no annotations, and no output schema, the description covers the key behavioral aspects thoroughly: safety gates, submit semantics, and shell interaction. It could mention the owner param, but overall it is contextually complete for safe and effective use.

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 coverage is high (83%), providing descriptions for most params. The description adds crucial semantics beyond the schema: the meaning of submit (separate bare Enter), the newline issue, and the mandatory confirm flag. It doesn't cover owner, but the added value for core params justifies a 4.

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 opens with a clear verb+resource: 'Type text into a live shell.' It specifies the tool's role precisely and distinguishes it from siblings by focusing on sending input to a shell, with special handling for TUI agents. The purpose is unambiguous and differentiated.

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?

Provides clear context on when to use submit:true vs. without submit, including the bracketed-paste pitfall and the need for a trailing newline. It doesn't explicitly name alternative tools like send_keys, but the usage scenarios are well defined, so it earns a 4 rather than a 5.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Eyalm321/hyperpanes-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server