Skip to main content
Glama
LamantinAI

kaeru memory

by LamantinAI
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Hybrid

share

Publish a memory node through existing sharing gates so collaborators can access project decisions, tasks, or hypotheses.

Instructions

Share a node using existing sharing gates.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
cloudNo
forceNo
initiativeYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed12 schema fields changedv0.8.0
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • removedInput schema / properties / cloud / default
      Removed value: -null
    • removedInput schema / properties / cloud / description
      Removed value: -"Target cloud name in a multi-cloud setup. Omit for the default cloud."
    • addedInput schema / properties / cloud / minLength
      Added value: +1
    • changedInput schema / properties / cloud / type
      Previous value: -[
-  "string",
-  "null"
-]New value: +"string"
    • removedInput schema / properties / force / description
      Removed value: -"Override the pre-share secret guard when it flags content. Default false."
    • removedInput schema / properties / initiative / description
      Removed value: -"Initiative scope — required; sharing is gated by its `share_policy`."
    • addedInput schema / properties / initiative / minLength
      Added value: +1
    • removedInput schema / properties / name / description
      Removed value: -"Node name or UUIDv7 id to share to the team cloud."
    • addedInput schema / properties / name / minLength
      Added value: +1
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "name",
-  "initiative"
-]New value: +[
+  "initiative",
+  "name"
+]
    • removedInput schema / title
      Removed value: -"ShareParams"
  2. First observedv0.7.5

TDQS

C2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The annotation already declares readOnlyHint=false, indicating a mutation. The description adds only that sharing requires "existing sharing gates", but it does not explain what those gates are, what permissions are needed, whether sharing is reversible, or what the "force" flag changes. For a mutation tool with minimal annotations, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The single sentence is technically concise but suffers from under-specification rather than efficient communication. "Sharing gates" is unexplained and the sentence wastes the only opportunity to tell the agent what the tool actually does and requires.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given four parameters (two required), zero schema descriptions, no output schema, and only a readOnly=false annotation, the description is far too thin. It does not cover the required initiative/name inputs, the meaning of cloud or force, or the expected outcome, leaving the agent unable to invoke the tool reliably.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, but it does not mention any of the four parameters. The required "initiative" and "name" fields, as well as "cloud" and "force", are left completely unexplained.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description names a specific verb ("Share") and resource ("node"), but the phrase "using existing sharing gates" is jargon that does not clarify scope. It also does not distinguish this tool from the sibling "unshare" or "link_cloud", leaving the agent to infer the difference.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as "unshare" or "link_cloud", nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The agent must guess the appropriate context from the name alone.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools