Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Loom

Loom

by MlkBlk-IT
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Ctx Transfer

ctx_transfer
Idempotent

Transfer context chunks between sessions or agents by linking them into the target session without duplicating data; original chunks stay in the source session.

Instructions

Transfer chunks from one session to another (cross-session / multi-agent).

Creates a junction-table link so the chunks become visible in the target session without duplicating data. The original chunks remain in the source session.

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": {
      "from_session": "<from_session>",
      "to_session": "<to_session>",
      "chunk_ids": "<chunk_ids>"
    },
    "name": "ctx_transfer"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
chunk_idsYeslist of chunk IDs to transfer
to_sessionYestarget session ID
from_sessionYessource session ID

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.3

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real context beyond them: the link is implemented as a junction-table entry, data is not duplicated, and the source chunks are retained. It stops short of covering failure cases (missing session, chunks already linked) or any permission requirements.

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?

Three short sentences with the action and scope front-loaded and zero filler. "without duplicating data" and "original chunks remain in the source session" restate the same non-destructive property twice, a minor redundancy.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the link-based, non-destructive behavior is the key thing an agent needs to know. Only edge-case behavior (invalid session, already-linked chunks) and any auth assumptions are left unstated.

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 description coverage is 100%, so from_session, to_session and chunk_ids are already documented as source session, target session, and a list of chunk IDs. The description adds no further semantics about ID formats, batch limits, or ordering, so baseline 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb and resource ("Transfer chunks from one session to another") plus the scope (cross-session / multi-agent). It also names the mechanism (a junction-table link), which clearly separates it from siblings like ctx_store and ctx_get.

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?

The parenthetical "cross-session / multi-agent" implies the situation where this tool applies, but there is no explicit when-to-use versus when-not guidance and no named alternative (e.g., copying via ctx_get + ctx_store). Usage must be inferred from the scenario hint.

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