Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@saihm/mcp-server-pro

@saihm/mcp-server-pro

Official
by SAIHM-Admin
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Share

saihm_share

Grant one other agent access to a single memory cell, named by cellId. Identify the recipient by the identity record file their identity-record command wrote: pass its path, in full, as recipientRecordFile (a relative path is read from the…

Instructions

Grant one other agent access to a single memory cell, named by cellId. Identify the recipient by the identity record file their identity-record command wrote: pass its path, in full, as recipientRecordFile (a relative path is read from the server's working directory), and the server reads the record and agent ID from it (no need to open the file). Or pass their recipientRecord with their recipientPinnedAgentIdHashHex, pinned out-of-band. With the file, pass recipientPinnedAgentIdHashHex too when the user has the agent ID from their colleague another way: it must match the agent ID in the file. Set scope to 'read', 'write' or 'readwrite'. Only that one cell is exposed, and sharing re-wraps its key rather than copying the memory.

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": {
      "cellId": "<cellId>"
    },
    "name": "saihm_share"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
scopeNoAccess scope (blank = read)
cellIdYesThe cell to share
expiryEpochNoOptional expiry in whole HOURS since the UNIX epoch (decimal string), not seconds: floor(unix_ms / 3600000). Example: "498192" is 2026-11-01 00:00 UTC. Blank = no expiry
recipientRecordNoThe grantee's published identity record (hex fields). Required unless recipientRecordFile is given
recipientRecordFileNoThe path of the grantee's identity record file, the JSON that identity-record writes, in full: a relative path is read from the server's working directory. The server reads recipientRecord and the agent ID from it. Instead of recipientRecord, not with it
recipientPinnedAgentIdHashHexNoThe grantee's agentIdHash (hex), pinned out-of-band. Required with recipientRecord; with recipientRecordFile, optional: the out-of-band check of the file, which must name the same agent ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv0.14.3
    • changedInput schema / properties / recipientPinnedAgentIdHashHex / description
      Previous value: -"The grantee's agentIdHash (hex), pinned out-of-band"New value: +"The grantee's agentIdHash (hex), pinned out-of-band. Required with recipientRecord; with recipientRecordFile, optional: the out-of-band check of the file, which must name the same agent ID"
    • changedInput schema / properties / recipientRecord / description
      Previous value: -"The grantee's published identity record (hex fields)"New value: +"The grantee's published identity record (hex fields). Required unless recipientRecordFile is given"
    • addedInput schema / properties / recipientRecordFile
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The path of the grantee's identity record file, the JSON that identity-record writes, in full: a relative path is read from the server's working directory. The server reads recipientRecord and the agent ID from it. Instead of recipientRecord, not with it",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "cellId",
-  "recipientRecord",
-  "recipientPinnedAgentIdHashHex"
-]New value: +[
+  "cellId"
+]
  2. Changed4 schema fields changedv0.14.1
    • changedInput schema / properties / expiryEpoch / description
      Previous value: -"Optional expiry as a UNIX-epoch count (decimal string)"New value: +"Optional expiry in whole HOURS since the UNIX epoch (decimal string), not seconds: floor(unix_ms / 3600000). Example: \"498192\" is 2026-11-01 00:00 UTC. Blank = no expiry"
    • changedInput schema / properties / expiryEpoch / pattern
      Previous value: -"^[0-9]+$"New value: +"^$|^[0-9]+$"
    • changedInput schema / properties / scope / description
      Previous value: -"Access scope (default read)"New value: +"Access scope (blank = read)"
    • changedInput schema / properties / scope / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "read",
-  "write",
-  "readwrite"
-]New value: +[
+  "",
+  "read",
+  "write",
+  "readwrite"
+]
  3. First observedv0.2.1

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Goes beyond the annotations by disclosing a non-obvious mechanism: sharing "re-wraps its key rather than copying the memory," and that only the single named cell is exposed. It does not mention reversibility, permissions/auth needs, or behavior on re-sharing an already-shared cell (relevant given idempotentHint=false).

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

Conciseness3/5

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

Front-loaded with the core action, but the middle section is a convoluted run-on ("With the file, pass recipientPinnedAgentIdHashHex too when the user has the agent ID from their colleague another way") and repeats the file-path rule already stated in the schema. Several clauses could be tightened without losing meaning.

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?

Given six parameters, a nested object, and no output schema, the description covers the hard parts: which recipient form to use, how paths resolve, and the pinning cross-check. It omits what a successful call returns and says nothing about revoking or expiry, though expiry is fully documented in the schema.

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 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description earns extra by clarifying relative-path resolution against the server's working directory, that the server extracts both the record and agent ID from the file, and the must-match constraint on recipientPinnedAgentIdHashHex. It adds nothing about expiryEpoch, which is left entirely to the schema.

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?

States a specific verb, resource, and scope: "Grant one other agent access to a single memory cell, named by cellId." It also tells the agent what is and isn't exposed ("Only that one cell is exposed"), which separates it from multi-cell or record-level operations among the saihm_* siblings.

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?

Gives clear routing guidance between the two mutual-exclusion paths (recipientRecordFile vs recipientRecord + pinned hash) and says when the pinned hash is optional versus required with the file. It does not name a sibling alternative or state exclusions (e.g., use saihm_revoke_share to undo), so it falls short of a 5.

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