cc-peer
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| list_peersA | List the remote machines this session can message and whether each is reachable. Each peer runs its own coding-agent session on that machine. |
| send_messageA | Send a message to the coding-agent session running on another machine and return its reply. The remote session keeps its own conversation history across calls; it works on that machine against its own files. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 2 tools
list_peers and send_message have completely distinct purposes—one enumerates reachable peers, the other transmits a message and returns a reply. There is no plausible way to confuse them.
Both names follow a clean verb_noun snake_case pattern (list_peers, send_message), with consistent, predictable verb choice.
Two tools is slightly thin for the stated peer-messaging scope, but each earns its place and the surface is not padded. A minimal discovery+send pair is a reasonable design.
The core lifecycle—discover peers, send a message, get a reply—is fully covered. Minor gaps exist (e.g. broadcasting to multiple peers or inspecting message history), but agents can work around them by iterating over peers.